Re: How to do XML to XML translation

[Paul Prescod <papresco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris Lilley wrote:
> 
> > What is an appropriate way to do it?
> 
> Style languages may appear to do some transformation, but this is merely
> a 1:n mapping of elements to flow objects (where n is between zero and
> several ;-)
> 
> The actual source tree is not changed; rather, a flow object tree is
> constructed that happens to not have the same structure as the source
> tree.

There is nothing in the word "transformation" that implies modifying a
source tree, to me. I think that I woudl define a transformation to be a
conversion where the domain and range are the same (e.g. XML and XML
instead of XML and Flow objects).
 
> To do semantic-preserving, high quality transformations, use a
> transformation language, not a style language. I suggest looking at
> CoST.

I don't see why CoST is better than Jade, which is definately a style
language. The principles of conversion and transformation are the same,
and Jade implements them both. As I recall, CoST can also be used as a
style language.

I think that Stefan Trcek's instincts are right on. If XSL almost does
what you need, it makes more sense to extend XSL (by modifying XSLJ, in
this case), than to go learn a completely different language based on
(shudder!) TCL.

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

Three things trust above all else: Your knowledge of your craft
That someone turns a profit, and that you will get the shaft
http://www.geezjan.org/humor/computers/threes.html


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