Subject: Re: XSL-optimized DTDs (Was: Re: Mixed content: selecting current context w/out child) From: "John E. Simpson" <simpson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 19:48:48 -0500 |
At 08:36 AM 3/15/99 +1100, Marcus Carr wrote: >I would be very reluctant to create data in a less intuitive structure >just to support one possible use of the data [e.g. XSL]. I would be much >more inclined to structure it as cleanly as possible and worry about how the data >is going to be handled when the time comes. If you're operating in a closed loop >then your approach would be fine, but if you will need to interchange with anyone >else, they're probably just going to think that your structure is over-defined. My >vote is for more work in the XSL and less complexity in the data. In general, I agree with the spirit of this (and its expression in your sig, Einstein's "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." :). Actually, though, I think the more granular/atomic the structure, the more flexibility downstream -- not just for XSL, but for querying and (yes) data interchange. For applications, it's easy to extract the structured data you want, even if apparently overly-nested, and ignore those portions of the structure that you don't... but harder (and needing more hard-coding and application-specific intelligence) to *add* structure to the source where it's no better than implicit. ========================================================== John E. Simpson | The secret of eternal youth simpson@xxxxxxxxxxx | is arrested development. http://www.flixml.org | -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL-optimized DTDs (Was: Re: Mi, Marcus Carr | Thread | Re: XSL-optimized DTDs (Was: Re: Mi, Marcus Carr |
Re: XSL-optimized DTDs (Was: Re: Mi, John E. Simpson | Date | Re: XSL-optimized DTDs (Was: Re: Mi, Marcus Carr |
Month |