Subject: RE: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML-Tables with row-span / col-span From: David Tolpin <dvd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:24:07 +0400 (AMT) |
> > Do you see any advantage in turning simple and obvious > > operation at the level of XSLT ( (exsl|xt):node-set ) into > > something optimization-based? > > > > I'm sorry, I don't understand the assumptions behind this line of > reasoning. To my mind, the RTF in 1.0 was a ghastly mess, with it's > rules that say "you can use it anywhere that a string can be used, it > then behaves like a document node converted to a string, but you can't > use it anywhere you can use a document node". Enforcing these > restrictions was a nightmare and led to really buggy and inefficient > code which I was very happy to throw away. Where exactly do you see the > merits of RTFs? I must think about it, I don't know how to explain my doubts. In SAXON 6, I had to switch between tiny tree and normal tree models to get performance close to XT for various stylesheets (which was still almost twice faster -- in one particular but rather important case). My impression is that restrictions imposed by RTF could be used to implement RTF generation more efficiently than node-sets. Since many stylesheets just generate result tree in one pass and do not convert them into node-sets (in XSLT 1.0), a good implementation could implement RTF in a much more efficent way than node-set. David Tolpin XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML, Jeff Kenton |
RE: [xsl] Loading XSL files from st, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML, Jeff Kenton |
Month |