Subject: Re: [xsl] Specification of a transform.|
From: davep <davep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:34:47 +0100
I'm not sure if I've interpreted you correctly, but Phil's reply seems to interpret your "no hierarchical simple relationship" as the key phrase here, interpreting it as meaning that a multi-phase transformation is needed.
Assume either way, for a simple case, assume not necessary, i.e. could be done reasonably easily with an xslt 1.0 transform.
In other words, I think Phil is assuming that your "no hierarchical simple relationship" is equivalent to saying that in terms of Jackson Structured Programming
there is a "structure clash" between the input and output schemas; and he follows JSP by recommending:
"If a structure clash is found, it is usually resolved by splitting the program into two parts, using an intermediate data structure to provide a common structural framework with which the two program parts can communicate."
MK showing has background <grin/> I emailed Phil (off list) stating I don't think this addresses the 'requirement'? It breaks the problem down, but leaves me with the 'how to specify input to intermediate' which may be easier, but still requires specification?
However, there are other parts of your problem statement where I simply don't know what you are talking about. Where do "literals" come into it, for example?
A simple case to state that the transform needs to add content which is not within the source XML.
-- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk