Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Fwd: Fwd: Streaming Transformations for XML
 Hi all, Petr, > From : Petr Cimprich [mailto:petr@g...] > To : Jandia Cyril > Subject : Re: Fwd: Streaming Transformations for XML > > Cyril, > > I will try to create at least a plain list of supported instructions and > axes, so that we have something to discuss. This could be a core of a > future language specs. I will send you a copy ASAP. Fine, thanx! > Some questions now :) > What are your plans? Are you considering to implement STX (or whatever > will be the name) in ESPX? Well, in fact, even before you first talked about that STX idea on the list, I was contemplating for some time to add sth like a simplified (subset) version of XPath (see this [tinyxsl-idea]) to my TinyXSL. [tinyxsl-idea] http://www.cjandia.com/2001/espx-tinyxsl/#xpath-subset Basically, I wanted to enhance TinyXSL's "select='...'" operator capabilities (which are, let me remind you, very limited for now - since they merely rely on ESPX's own capabilities of its DOM(-like, again!) API). For various reasons, notably the overhead that it would probably imply on current ESPX processing, I didn't push the idea further - but I imagine it is more realistic w/ a processing model occurring in the context of SAX axes rather than of XPath's... so read on : Now, about a game plan, since you came w/ your STX, which is -I believe- interesting on its own (processing model, SAX axes, maybe RegExps for the "character::" axe, etc), I think I could easily take advantage of that existing TinyXSL's implementation to propose you(us) a first, test-of-concept, reference implementation of STX the same way (i.e, how I first wrote ESPX, surfacing a very simplified DOM-like ECMAScript object model, and then, wrote TinyXSL which use the latter). That is, either : 1) (preferred) current ESPX => rewrite of ESPX with SAX API added => STX processor (from scratch) or 2) (less clean, but quicker maybe) current TinyXSL => modified TinyXSL emulating needed SAX axes (modifying the way it performs ESPX's mini-DOM crossing) => STX processor > And what about TinyXSL? Or do you see TinyXSL and STX fully mergable? Sure, at least if -as far as an ECMAScript implementation of either or both is acknowledged to be useful. Then, I see no reason to either merge them or develop STX in parallel (but preferably building up from ESPX and/or TinyXSL in either cases, instead of a complete rewrite from scratch - see above). > And, yes I like the RegExp idea at the first glance. We just have to > decide, whether to use RE when matching templates or inside templates > (stx:if) or both. Right, that's it. > [...] > Petr Cimprich > Ginger Alliance > www.gingerall.com Regards, Cyril Jandia http://www.cjandia.com/ Author of ESPX/TinyXSL http://www.cjandia.com/2001/espx-tinyxsl/ 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
