Subject: RE: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML-Tables with row-span / col-span From: David Tolpin <dvd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 18:47:37 +0400 (AMT) |
> > Except that RTF can be generated much more efficiently than > > node-set; and some implementations fell into a trap somewhere > > around this issue while implementing extension node-set call > > -- making it too inefficient. Not having to explicitely > > convert RTF to a node-set can lead to either inefficient code > > or to complex non-local optimizations in the processor. > > > ...are you saying keep RTF's (and the corresponding explicit node-set > conversion) in 2.0 for performance reasons? node-set should be kept in XSLT for reasons which are much more serious than performance. I can see reasons why one can want to drop it; however, the experience with XSLT 1.0 shows that node-set is a dangerous area. Having it hidden behind the scenes just makes implementation bugs harder to discover and computational complexity issue (for which I will eventually be linched on this list) much more complicated. Would you live with the fact that an algorithm which was linear in XSLT 1.0 would be quadratic in XSLT 2.0? Do you see any advantage in turning simple and obvious operation at the level of XSLT ( (exsl|xt):node-set ) into something optimization-based? The fact that in SAXON it is just a single bit does not mean it is the way to go by itself. David Tolpin http://davidashen.net/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML, Andrew Welch | Thread | RE: [xsl] Normalize / Simplify HTML, Michael Kay |
RE: [xsl] is there any tool that au, Kienle, Steven C | Date | RE: [xsl] is there any tool that au, Willink, Ed |
Month |