Subject: Re: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT From: "James A. Robinson" <jim.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:11:02 -0700 |
> still see a few vital requirements that I haven't yet seen a way to do > in XSLT 2.0. A basic-functionality replacement would need to be able to: > - work with relational databases (believe it or not, many of us still > need to work with these) > - access HTTP data (headers, GET/POST data) > - send e-mail > - read/write binary data (admittedly getting picky, but the base > restriction from XML makes this hairy) > there are several flavors out on the market these days, each of which > seem to do it wrong in their own way from an XSLT-based perspective. It > seems like it'd be a good idea to write up a spec for these common > tasks, figure out the way to Do It Right, and design an XML-based > language to do exactly that. Since both would Just XML, this language > could work hand-in-hand with XSLT 2.0 (and other XML-based technologies I think you're raising a good point. To do exactly those things you list above we ended up implementing services we could get at or talk to via XSLT. Once you've got a way of running HTTP POST operations from XSLT, reading the results, it becomes simple to build XML wrappers around SQL queries (think an XML version of the JDBC APIs) to interact with an RBMS. Running inside of Tomcat and a Servlet, it is possible to generate an XML representation of the incoming HTTP request and run ones XSLT transformation against that. Sending e-mail is an HTTP POST operation to a service point. Reading and writing binaries is something we're only half-way doing, but we are streaming it to and from various locations using XML to communicate the various URIs, and we're building that XML via XSLT. I think your instinct to look for common specifications is exactly the thing needed. I don't know if those will develop (like ASF and APP developed), but I do get the feeling that many companies are inventing and re-inventing the same wheels w/re to XML and interoperability with other services. But once you've got those XML oriented service points, and hopefully have everything addressable via URI, XSLT becomes a really great way to interact with it all. Jim - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - James A. Robinson jim.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx Stanford University HighWire Press http://highwire.stanford.edu/ +1 650 7237294 (Work) +1 650 7259335 (Fax)
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, Houghton,Andrew | Thread | Re: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, Colin Paul Adams |
Re: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, Colin Paul Adams | Date | RE: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, Scott Trenda |
Month |