Re: [xsl] XSLT or DOM or SAX?

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT or DOM or SAX?
From: "David Halsted" <halstedd@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:52:17 -0500
Yes, in general XSLT makes things easy that are more difficult in DOM or SAX
(or at least take more code), but at a performance cost.  SAX is great,
though, if you are concerned about performance in handling large documents.
For what it matters, I tend to use XSLT when I know that the XML involved
will be small because it makes things so easy, DOM when I need persistent
structures (and have some sense for the size of the files involved), and SAX
when I'm running through files that may be large, like XML-ized versions of
data from large databases.  If you are looking for functionality you can't
find in XSLT, you have the option of extending it.

Dave Halsted

----- Original Message -----
From: James Robertson <jamesr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 5:13 PM
Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT or DOM or SAX?

> At 07:50 3/01/2001, Craig Pfeifer wrote:
> >I wanted to know how you knew if/when you have reached the limits of
> >and it's time to look at a DOM / SAX solution? What sorts of
> >transformations are too difficult/awkward to accomplish in XSLT and are
> >better left to DOM / SAX implementations?
> DOM/SAX seems a pretty low-level alternative
> to XSLT.
> You might want to have a look at Omnimark
> instead for more complex transformations.
> J
> -------------------------
> James Robertson
> Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
> SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
> Illumination: an out-of-the-box Intranet solution
> jamesr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread