Re: Doubts regarding XSL and DOM

Subject: Re: Doubts regarding XSL and DOM
From: "Amit Rekhi" <amitr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:20:00 +0530
         Thanks very much for your time in clearing my doubts :-)

>Depends on what you mean by "traverse". Might help if you provided a
>concrete example.
By "traverse" I meant complete access to the src. XML tree. in all possible
ways. for eg. say getting all the nodes that are children of say "foo"
element etc.
I guess all that is possible through the pattern syntax of XSL, and if some
of the "traversals"(as I read it) are not then the pattern syntax needs to
be made richer (as you stated) rather than DOM interfaces being introduced.

>If you mean you want to do something more complicated than XSL's query
>language and templates will support, you either don't use XSL, or you use
>the escape mechanisms that may (or may not) be designed into XSL.

Yes. Now I understand , why there is no place for DOM into XSL.  DOM is an
API used by a prog. lang/application, XSL is neither , simply because it was
put togther to be a query , tranformation language. So anything outside the
scope of patterns / templates , will need an escape mech. (in case of DOM a
programming language , as Paul pointed out).

> Early versions of XSL did have some support for Ecmascript, which was
>DOM-like read-only access into the model... The current spec doesn't have
>that feature,
It was the "DOM-like read-only access" in the earlier versions that made me
think of DOM with XSL.

>but I get the impression that it hasn't yet been ruled out for future
I feel it would be proper to have "DOM-like read-only access" methods as
they would leverage the XSL pattern syntax by giving them a DOM like feel.


 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread