Ian Hickson shows why XSLT on the client side can be a bad idea. In Ian's words:
Transformations should be done on the server side, so that what is sent over the wire is in a well-known format (HTML, MathML, etc). The UA can then decide whether to display the content using the author's styling hints (CSS) or to display the content using its own rules (as Lynx does, as Opera typically does on hand-held devices such my mobile phone, as voice-based browsers do, etc).
Sound advice, to be sure. But we're careful not to rule out client-side transformations altogether. We still support transforming RSS feeds into usable documents via client-side XSLT. After all, RSS is practically useless in the browser without transformations. We recognize that this is probably obvious.
Update: After re-reading the above section of this entry we feel compelled to clarify. Server-side transformations are desirable; we submit only that it's worse to serve an unstyled, unformatted RSS document to browsers than to transform such a document client-side. We were worried that some developers may not realize that RSS is really a proprietary format. If you were going to send RSS over the wire anyway, you might as well transform it for browsers (especially if you are incapable of doing so server-side). Lynx wasn't going to be able to handle it, anyway.
In other news, Ben Trott announces XML::Atom, a Perl implementation of the Atom API; Anil Dash interviews Paul Bausch; Adam Kalsey helps his kids understand what he does for a living by helping them do what he does for a living; Ben Bishop releases Aura, a set of standards-compliant site templates; The WaSP points to The Bare Bones, No Crap, CSS Text Control Primer, by Wendy Peck; and James Robertson links an excellent article by Henrik Olsen most accurately described by its subtitle: How visual simplicity can harm usability.