Re: Merging XML

Subject: Re: Merging XML
From: Tom Mullen <Tom.Mullen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:09:59 +0000 (GMT)
Oliver,

>I'm not sure if the approach using key() is promising.

I had half suspected that key() would be more problematic for a generic
solution.

However, I'm currently using your updated stylesheet on a 800 node test
file.  At the moment it's performed about 10% in 12 mins.

Am I right in thinking that key() is more efficient than searching through
nodes using a <xslt:for-each>.  If so, then for large problems, key() may
be the only reasonable solution.

> However - it's an interesting idea. Nobody will stop you finding an 
> alternative approach! :-)

I'd like to claim credit for the idea, but it was Jeni Tennison's (another
one for her FAQ?).

Although I'm not looking for something super-fast, 2+ hours is a bit too
long. I'm resigned to thinking that a solution that uses a priori knowledge
about the format of the XML is my only way forward.

Thanks

Tom

-----------------------------------------------------------------
        Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com

Any views expressed in this message are those of  the  individual
sender,  except  where  the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread
  • Merging XML
    • Roshan Sharma - Thu, 03 Aug 2000 20:40:40 GMT
      • Tom Mullen - Fri, 04 Aug 2000 08:48:58 +0000 (GMT)
      • Tom Mullen - Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:20:55 +0000 (GMT)
      • <Possible follow-ups>
      • Oliver Becker - Mon, 7 Aug 2000 10:08:06 +0200 (MET DST)
        • Tom Mullen - Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:09:59 +0000 (GMT) <=
      • Oliver Becker - Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:30:19 +0200 (MET DST)