[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)

• From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
• To: xml-dev@l..., www-xml-blueberry-comments@w...
• Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 15:57:35 +0800

 From: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@m...>

> That would be a naive approach. DOM could easily be implemented so this
was not an issue. For example, give every element, attribute, and processing
instruction a boolean usesBlueberry flag. Then have the document keep a
reference count of the number of Blueberry items in the document that could
be incremented and decremented as nodes were added to the document.

"Could be" does not equal "will be".  The developer will still need to check
out whether the DOM is blueberry-capable.

And, in any case, the DOM might be implemented as an access layer on an
existing database, which does not have such a flag. In such cases, the naive
approach is the only one practical.

In any case, the cost of having flags (or a collective count) updated during
every write may be greater than that of doing two passes, surely. It depends
on the access patterns.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• References:
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: Rick Jelliffe <ricko@a...>
  • Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Conversion of SQL Query to XML
• Next by Date: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Previous by thread: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Next by thread: Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread