Subject: Re: [xsl] What's your visual metaphor for XSL Transformations?|
From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:37:44 +0100
On 3/23/07, bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Okay 2 things here; > > 1. > I would like the examples of these things. Not because I don't believe > they exist but because I would like to see if there are some I hadn't > thought of before (is this 2.0 we're talking about, probably give lots > more examples that way)
You are not saying exactly which "these things".
I guess I meant: > People are seriouly considering XSLT transformations that implement
fundamenal (and non-stop) server-side logic.
I inferred non-stop to mean a transformation that was running continually, not one that was started with each GET for example
There are plenty of XSLT 1.0 examples of useful transformations that do not need/use a source xml document.
Take for example Jeni's famous stylesheets that you have to double-click on their names in Windows Explorer in order to get them going.
Okay haven't seen these but I suppose that it is done with the processing instruction with the stylesheet calling itself. This is a nice hack yes, but by my definition of input document it still needs an input document.
To be more precise, it is a transformation that can be *unlimited, or indefinite* in time, not the transformation engine.
sorry I didn't read your post as meaning a transformation that takes however long it needs to complete its calculation. From your language I assumed a transformation that was never assumed to stop, that ran forever and output a stream of markup. Let's say a Jabber bot that runs against itself. Of course I immediately thought, well that might cause problems.
> > Just to repeat: > > > > There are no technical or practical reasons why a transformation > > should not be unlimited in time.
the practical reasons have to do with what your hardware or processor can handle I suppose, or maybe how long a human being can wait to get the result of a calculation, but I agree that unlimited when meaning until the calculation is complete is fine, unlimited when assumed to mean running continually would be something different.
By the way, I don't know if you took it as such but this was not meant to be an attack on using XSL-T for innovative things it is supposed generally not meant for, especially as I have probably done quite a bit of that, it was looking to see if you had some examples I wasn't aware of. I am aware of FXSL and follow it quite a bit.
Cheers, Bryan Rasmussen