Subject: Re: XSL Theory From: Rick Geimer <Rick.Geimer@xxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 12:11:12 -0800 |
I thought that the "Turing Completeness" of XSLT made such a proof impossible. Am I correct? Rick Geimer National Semiconductor rick.geimer@xxxxxxx Jon Smirl wrote: > > The restrictions on no side effects and the one way (input to output > transform) nature of XSL should make this a much easier problem than the > general problem of proving the correctness of computer programs. > > From: "Kay Michael" <Michael.Kay@xxxxxxx> > > I suspect if you take the problem the other way round, and try to prove > > incorrectness, you will make a lot more progress. I would think there are > a > > large number of cases where, given a schema to which the source document > > A useful subset of the proof would be to simply prove that a given > stylesheet's output always conforms to a schema. > Is it possible to write a program that could analyze a stylesheet and figure > out it's output schema? > > I've always thought that a much more efficient XSL transformation engine > could be written that requires a schema for it's input and output documents. > There are many times I trigger a pattern match when I already know there is > a single choice. If the XSL engine had the schemas to work with it could > optimize out the unnecessary pattern match. > > Jon Smirl > jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL Theory, Steve Schafer | Thread | Re: XSL Theory, David Carlisle |
Re: XSL Theory, Steve Schafer | Date | Re: XSL Theory, David Carlisle |
Month |