Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons

Subject: Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons
From: "Steve Muench" <smuench@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 16:36:49 -0700
| None of them meet the spec fully, except Saxon, so far as I can see.

The known areas of non-conformance for the Oracle processor
(latest release are:

 -> namespace:: axis not yet implemented

 -> "case-order" attribute on <xsl:sort> not supported yet
    (no processor I tested supported this yet)

These are pretty minor in the grand scheme of things,
but will be addressed in upcoming releases.

| I can blow up Xalan and Oracle fairly easily;

>From private email I know what you mean by "blow up"
here, but others might not. It does *not* mean "crash"
but rather "make consume a lot of memory, thus causing
my Java VM to page, thus sending it into a fit because
Java VM's and paging to disk don't go well in the
same sentence". 

Recall that I sent you the results of your excellent 
"Roman Graveyard" document and companion XSLT stylesheets 
which, given enough memory, completes very quickly using
our processor. Java VM's are funny when they start needing 
to use virtual memory, so in your case with less memory you
observed that the transformation looked like it took forever.
Using your testcase and others we've worked for on
our memory usage so I'll hopefully have good news to report
shortly on this front.

Steve Muench, Lead XML Evangelist & Consulting Product Manager
Business Components for Java & XSQL Servlet Development Teams
Oracle Rep to the W3C XSL Working Group
Author "Building Oracle XML Applications", O'Reilly, Oct 2000

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread