Subject: RE: [xsl] need help explaining one data structure over another From: "Matthew L. Avizinis" <mla@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:45:29 -0400 |
Yes, reasonable. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Hunsberger, > Peter > Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 9:57 AM > To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' > Subject: RE: [xsl] need help explaining one data structure over another > > > > > Help me out [...] an please give me [...] a good argument for > why system 2 > > is advantageous over system 1. > > Sorry, I'm going to also vote for system 1. Having done a lot of generic > XSLT I definitely prefer an XML input stream that a) does not make any > assumptions about how it will be processed; and b) uses XML structure to > indicate hierarchy and not element names. > > In your case, argument d) would seem to be particularly relevant; you've > already got a perfectly reasonable way to indicate the > relationship of each > item to each other (the XML hierarchy) why would you also want to > invent an > artificial naming convention to duplicate the same information? > > > 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] need help explaining one , Hunsberger, Peter | Thread | RE: [xsl] need help explaining one , Matthew L. Avizinis |
Re: Antwort: Re: [xsl] two xml sour, Mike Brown | Date | RE: [xsl] need help explaining one , Matthew L. Avizinis |
Month |