Re: handling namespaces in advance Re: [xsl] namespace required in transform

Subject: Re: handling namespaces in advance Re: [xsl] namespace required in transform
From: Francis Norton <francis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 12:18:35 +0100
And if you're not just reading non-xml text but communicating with a non-xml application, you might like to have a look at chapter 9 of Professional XML for .Net Developers which similarly implements event-based XmlReaders and XmlWriters that are actually communicating with lowe-level Visio and Word 2000 APIs.

Francis.

Michael Kay wrote:

You might like to re-read the "family tree" case study in XSLT
Programmer's Reference, where I construct the data model directly from a
GEDCOM file - no XML involved. The XSLT processor is simply front-ended
with a parser that implements the SAX XMLReader interface, but takes
GEDCOM rather than XML as input.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx
work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James Fuller
Sent: 22 July 2002 09:40
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: handling namespaces in advance Re: [xsl] namespace required in transform





I don't see why the actual syntatic construction of xml could not itself be abstracted( instead of angle brackets, why not slashes...etc ) and defined, a sorta schema for base/physical format; maybe this is a route of introducing binary xml....ok yes there are issues all over the place, just a thought.


This is precisely why XSLT and XPath define the data model as an abstraction. You don't have to create the data model from a

source XML

document, you can create it from anything. If you want to define a format that is like XML except that the namespace declarations are contained in the end tags, you are free to do so, so long

as you can

parse it into the XPath data model. Whether it will catch

on or not is

another matter...


hmmmm, sometimes I think the W3's best intentions get buried in the language.....wow....completely missed this point !

sorry to extend this thread, this is a very interesting point....which is particularly relevent in a current project that is hitting performance issues, and I am desperate for any fallback positions.

so I assume I have to read http://www.w3.org/TR/query-datamodel/ again, > and this time I have to 'get it'...any other pointers to related work would be greatly appreciated....but after 5 minutes of googling....I suspect yet again, that I am walking down a lonely path.

thx for making yet another concept clear to my poor little mind.

cheers, jim fuller


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






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





-- "Never mind manoeuvre, go straight at 'em." - Admiral Horatio Nelson




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



Current Thread