Subject: Re: [xsl] Streaming terminology: Grounded From: Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 11:40:12 +0000 |
> The construct copy-of(.) is *grounded* because, > when executed, it result in nodes that are > not stream-processed. > > Is that correct? yes. > > Now for a question please. Yesterday Michael wrote: > > > Grounded expressions can be consuming, > > Yes, I can see that. The copy-of(.) construct reads (consumes) the input and results in nodes that are not stream-processed. > > > and non-grounded expressions can be non-consuming. > > That is saying there are expressions which, when evaluated, do not read (consume) the input and yield nodes that are stream-processed, right? > > Would you give an example of this please? > The expression ../@code is climbing and motionless Other examples are a little artificial, but still exist: * Non-streamable expressions such as preceding-sibling::* are neither grounded nor consuming. * The expression "." has posture that depends on the context item posture, and sweep that is intrinsically motionless. So in a context like child::x/name(.) the expression "." has posture = striding, sweep = motionless Michael Kay Saxonica
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Streaming terminology: Gr, Costello, Roger L. | Thread | [xsl] A Poor Man's XPROC, Ihe Onwuka |
Re: [xsl] Streaming terminology: Gr, Costello, Roger L. | Date | [xsl] A Poor Man's XPROC, Ihe Onwuka |
Month |