Subject: Re: Fw: W3C-transformation language petition From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 16:27:55 +0800 |
> Yes, in order to become a generalized graph-to-graph transformation >language, as opposed to a tree-to-tree transformation language, XLink issues >need to be dealt with. For example, currently the ability to transform >graphs which are constructed via links between disparate source documents is >lacking (or severely limited). This has been a big issue in the relatively simple XSL I've done to produce xmlsoftware.com. What I end up doing is: * having empty prologs in my documents (yuk! I hate doing that) * making one big document that declares all the associated documents as external entities (hence the need to have empty prologs) and references them * using the XSL stylesheet on the big document. That way documents can reference one another in a pseudo ID/IDREF kind of way. James -- James Tauber / jtauber@xxxxxxxxxxx / www.jtauber.com Associate Researcher, Electronic Commerce Network Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia Full-day XML Tutorial @ WWW8 : http://www8.org/ Maintainer of : www.xmlinfo.com, www.xmlsoftware.com and www.schema.net XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Fw: W3C-transformation language, Jonathan Borden | Thread | Fw: Fw: W3C-transformation language, Oren Ben-Kiki |
XSL Examples updated, James Tauber | Date | Re: result-tree vocabularies and no, James Tauber |
Month |