Re: More XSL Discussion

[Paul Prescod <papresco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Kay wrote:
> 
> You're right, it doesn't make sense to create half an HTML element. It does
> make sense, however, to generate one "output" HTML element as a result of
> encountering a fairly complex input XML pattern. 

This is a hard problem, but matching larger patterns may well be the
best way to attack this. Still, one must weigh the cost of complicating
the language with a new construct vs. using ad hoc coding tricks in the
rare case that it comes up. The convention I would usually use is

Check if node is first in row
   if so, make the wrapper, and 
	process it's matching siblings in a special mode
   else don't do anything

<special-mode>
	put the real behaviour for the nodes here
</special-mode>

This is ugly, but not too painful. The alternative is a whole new
language construct for multi-element pattern matching.

I could be wrong, but I think that this is the kind of problem that the
"transformation part" of DSSSL (which is not really on the table for web
implementation) is supposed to be really good at -- pattern matching to
augment structure. Perhaps people like James and Henry who are
knowledgable about both will find a reasonable way to combine them.

Paul Prescod  - http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

[Woody Allen on Hollywood in "Annie Hall"]
Annie: "It's so clean down here."
Woody: "That's because they don't throw their garbage away. They make 
        it into television shows."


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list