RE: [xsl] lookup-table thoughts (was Re: matching multiple times, outputting once?

["McKeever, Marty" <marty.mckeever@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Both of these posts are very clever -- i'm going to have to take some time
to fully grok them.  Unfortunately for me, my original post was unclear and
dimitre solved the exact opposite of my problem. (transforming my desired
output into my xml input, Doh!)

I was just informed that our mail server has been clogged for the past day
or so, so please forgive any duplicates or test messages i sent yesterday.

Thanks
Marty


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Myers [mailto:tommy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 1:58 PM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [xsl] lookup-table thoughts (was Re: matching multiple times,
> outputting once?
> 
> 
> I'm just thinking about different styles of lookup-table solutions,
> in particular thinking about what Dimitre posted yesterday, recasting
> that same solution in terms of xsl:key with a lookup template,
> and comparing them briefly, hoping that somebody will say something 
> to contribute to my education...
> 
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2001 21:43:17 -0800 (PST), Dimitre Novatchev 
> <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> 
> solved Marty McKeever's problem of mapping source XML
> ------------------------------------------------------------ 
> <contents> 
> <b>Hello</b> 
> <i><b>Hello</b></i> 
> <u><i><b>Hello</b></i></u> 
> </contents>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> into target XML
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> <emphasis bold="yes">Hello</emphasis> 
> <emphasis italic="yes" bold="yes">Hello</emphasis> 
> <emphasis underline="yes" italic="yes" bold="yes">Hello</emphasis>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> with the stylesheet
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" 
>    xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"; 
>    xmlns:trans="myTrans" exclude-result-prefixes="trans" 
>  >
> <xsl:output indent="yes" omit-xml-declaration="yes"/>
> 
> <trans:trans> 
>    <in>b</in> <out>bold</out>
>    <in>i</in> <out>italic</out>
>    <in>u</in> <out>underline</out> 
> </trans:trans> 
> 
> <xsl:variable name="vTrans" select="document('')/*/trans:*"/> 
> <xsl:template match="b | i | u"> 
> <emphasis> 
>    <xsl:apply-templates select="." mode="emph"/> 
> </emphasis> 
> </xsl:template> 
> 
> <xsl:template match="b | i | u" mode="emph"> 
>    <xsl:variable name="vEmphName" 
>      select="$vTrans/in[. = 
> name(current())]/following-sibling::out[1]"/> 
>    <xsl:attribute name="{$vEmphName}">yes</xsl:attribute> 
>    <xsl:apply-templates mode="emph"/> 
> </xsl:template> 
> 
> </xsl:stylesheet>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> and I looked at that and thought it was very cool, and wondered what
> class of examples it might be an instance of. And I also wondered
> whether the lookup table would be better or worse if recast 
> as xsl:key,
> so I did that: I replaced the xsl:variable name="vTrans" with:
> 
> <xsl:key name="transkey" match="out" use="preceding-sibling::in[1]"/>
> 
> and then I changed the definition of xsl:variable 
> name="vEmphName" from
> a clever XPath to a simple template call as:
> 
> <xsl:variable name="vEmphName">
>     <xsl:call-template name="lookup-trans">
>        <xsl:with-param name="in" select="name(.)"/>
>     </xsl:call-template>
> </xsl:variable> 
> 
> and then wrote the lookup-trans template as:
> 
> <xsl:template name="lookup-trans">
>    <xsl:param name="in" select="''"/>
>    <xsl:for-each select="document('')"> <!-- or whatever doc 
> holds table -->
>      <xsl:value-of select="key('transkey',$in)"/>
>    </xsl:for-each>
> </xsl:template>
> 
> and I didn't change anything else...the output is identical. I do like
> the fact that I can take the <trans:trans> lookup table into another
> document, say transtrans.xml, and then use document('transtrans.xml')
> instead of document('') in the lookup template, with no other change;
> I guess if we were talking about really big lookup tables, the key
> solution would be faster. On the other hand, the original is a bit
> shorter; I don't know a way to justify saying that one solution is
> cleaner than another. Are there other issues? Am I missing something
> fundamental, as usual? (Is there something I should have been reading,
> rather than posting this? That happens a lot too. Certainly I should
> have been doing non-XSL things rather than any of this, anyway.)
> 
> Tom Myers
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list