Re: [xsl] What's your visual metaphor for XSL Transformations?

Subject: Re: [xsl] What's your visual metaphor for XSL Transformations?
From: "Dimitre Novatchev" <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:06:22 -0700
I agree that these facts may seem strange to perceive.

Dimitre Novatchev
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play

On 3/22/07, Robert Koberg <rob@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:15:00 -0400, Dimitre Novatchev
<dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 3/22/07, Robert Koberg <rob@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> uff... I can't resist. I open my legs to ridicule:
>> I think using XSL on XML is like sailing (Sax is like surfing) -- that
>> is
>> my imagining -- at least it helps me :). You basically do what you can
>> given the water (standards), wind (XML) your boat (XSL)  - but you still
>> have to get to your destination.
> A few things:
>   1. There is no need to have any source XML document.

whatev... seriously, do you consider this an arguement? How do you
transform nothing?

>   2. There is no need to "get to your destination". You may be
> producing results non-stop all the time and they may be used by
> consumers (say in a pipeline) as soon as a new result appears. Here by
> "result" it is good to mean anyone of the possibly unlimited number of
> final result trees that the XSLT 2.0 Recommendation allows a
> transformation to produce (for example using <xsl:result-document ...
> /> instructions)

do you still need to get to your destination? Or do you prefer spinning
your wheels but making alot of smoke and noise?

A destination may be a 'way station' or 'crossing a buoy', but you have to
get there before you can proceed.

Perhaps think of the lesser known Xeno who says before you can get to your
destination you must get to the half-way point. Before you can get to the
half way point you must get to its half way point and so on.

Oh sorry, this is different - I suppose, like the thread.

>   3. A good tail-recursive implementation can guarantee that
> "unlimited-stack-depth" recursion will be performed naturally without
> any problems such as "stack overflow"

umm.., so?

>   4. It is not an absolute requirement for such a transformation to
> access an "infinite data structure" although if necessary such access
> can be implemeted using a "on-demand", or a "partially produced" one
> using a lazy evaluation approach.

well... you have brought in this "infinite date structure" which exists in
your mind, so ...?


Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:

Current Thread