Subject: Re: New XSL Optimization From: Francis Norton <francis@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 13:18:00 +0100 |
Paul Prescod wrote: > > Francis Norton wrote: > > > Did the designers of the xml Schema consider Forest Theory as a basis > > for their proposal, given their unfulfilled mandate to look at the issue > > of schema evolution? > > At least two of the schema working group members are knowledtable about > forest automata theory but that group is being asked to do a hell of a lot > of stuff from people with widely varying backgrounds. Nobody has time to > do all of the appropriate "homework." > Had we but world enough, and time / doing all the 'homework' would be no crime... > > Alternatively, have the Forest proponents considered offering an xml > > schema standard together with some open source code (XSLT, or > > JavaScript+DOM) as a proof-of-concept? > > Well forest proponents are not a team or a political party. Murata-san has > shown how forest automata can be used to develop schemas that are context > sensitive. I don't think anyone has implemented a full schema-evolution > solution. > Fair enough! I suspect the rest of this conversation belongs more on xml-dev - once I've either sorted out or despaired of my current XSLT / xml-schema performance problems. -- Francis Norton. Air Rage - a "flight *and* fight" reaction? XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: New XSL Optimization, Paul Prescod | Thread | RE: New XSL Optimization, Kay Michael |
Re: Whitespace again, Joerg Bauer | Date | RE: XSLT vs JSP, Sebastian Rahtz |
Month |