|
|
 next
|
  Subject: Cannot connect to SQL server
Author: Igor Ikonnikov
Date: 10 Nov 2006 04:59 PM
Originally Posted: 10 Nov 2006 03:54 PM
|
Connectivity to SQL is not "just" a feature to me - this is a critical one. Without that I'm ready to return the product for refund. Why would I need the Enterprise edition without data mapping functionality?
I find the UI for XML Schema editing extremely cumbersome to use: the Diagram view is overloaded with useless graphics, the Tree view forces you into too many clicks to get the picture you want to see, settings readily available in Spy (e.g. configuration of sample XML file) are hidden in the Options. Etc., etc., etc.
XSLT editor is not bad, but the built-in engine fails to understand heavily recursive calls, and so does the much praised Saxon. Even when they do, it takes them from 20 to 40 minutes to run transformation on a 5MB XML file, whereas the much cursed MSXML does the same in 4 to 8 seconds (not minutes). The only real advantage over the Spy I have found so far: better handling of large XML files (have not seen "out of memory" message yet).
And I greatly miss "Save to URL" option (available in Spy).
I kept hearing praises from people I respect (Priscilla Walmsley, Norman Walsh) and finally decided to give it a try, but what I found definitely did not meet my expectations. I've been working with XML technologies since 2001 and have been using Spy since 2003, that is to say: I'm not new to XML editing. Yet, with SS I am experiencing quite a steep "learning" curve.
Sorry for these pessimistic notes, but it took me a while to persuade my management to give Stylus a try and I'm having hard time finding practical advantages of the Stylus over the Spy (at the Enterprise Suite level).
|
|
next
|
  Subject: Cannot connect to SQL server
Author: Ivan Pedruzzi
Date: 10 Nov 2006 07:02 PM
|
Hi Igor,
> I find the UI for XML Schema editing extremely cumbersome to use: the Diagram view is overloaded
> with useless graphics,
This is clearly subjective, even if I am very surprise. XMLSpy schema editor force you to continuously switch between the list of global element and graphical part and yet the text view.
While Stylus Studio Schema editor let you work in the same window.
It would be useful to understand what do you mean with "useless graphics" and
"the Tree view forces you into too many clicks to get the picture"
>XSLT editor is not bad, but the built-in engine fails to understand heavily recursive calls, and so >does the much praised Saxon.
Which XSLT processor are you currently using to run your stylesheets?
Are you asserting that spy processor is better the Saxon? It would useful to see use cases to support such theory.
>Even when they do, it takes them from 20 to 40 minutes to run transformation on a 5MB XML file,
Running Saxon through Stylus Studio has a price in term of performance because of the heavy wiring for debugging, backmapping, and profiling, etc. We are working on that in our next release.
But it takes just one click to generate a Java application and set Saxon free :)
>And I greatly miss "Save to URL" option (available in Spy).
In Stylus Studio you don’t need to use a different command. File -> Save -> then you can pick FTP, HTTP, ect
>Sorry for these pessimistic notes, but it took me a while to persuade my management to give Stylus a >try and I'm having hard time finding practical advantages of the Stylus over the Spy (at the >Enterprise Suite level).
We have been working on XML tools for the last seven years and we don't get discourage by criticisms, on the contrary Stylus Studio evolved thanks to the feedback we have received.
Thank You
Ivan Pedruzzi
Stylus Studio Team
|
|
|
|
top