|
Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT Streaming Terminology: why is it called "striding"? From: Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 11:07:26 +0000 |
On 9 Feb 2014, at 10:38, Costello, Roger L. <costello@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > A striding construct is one that returns a sequence of items and the items are all disjoint (item i is not nested in item j). > > Why are such constructs called "striding"? Would you please give some intuition on why such constructs are called striding? Largely whimsical, I was having a bit of fun. In the earlier spec they (or the nearest equivalent) were called "incrementally consuming"; but in the new analysis self::* comes out as striding but not consuming. The word "crawling" is fairly natural for something that visits every node of a tree (visualise a caterpillar), and I wanted a contrast for something that skips across from one branch of a tree to another without visiting all the leaves. I thought of "skipping" but that seemed to have connotations implying that there are nodes that are not processed. > > Also, why is striding important? I think that striding constructs are important because: > > The sequence of items returned by a striding > construct can be operated on in a streaming > fashion. > > Is that correct? > Seems a gross over-simplification. The essence of striding expressions is that they deliver a sequence of nodes with disjoint subtrees, so you can process (and consume) the subtree of one node in the sequence before moving on to the next. Michael Kay Saxonica
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| Re: [xsl] XSLT Streaming Terminolog, Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] XSLT streaming: is a "stridin, Costello, Roger L. |
| Re: [xsl] XSLT Streaming Terminolog, Michael Kay | Date | [xsl] Re: XSL:FO approach for facin, Martin Holmes |
| Month |