RE: namespace values
> Leigh Dodds suggested that RDDL might be used to cobble together > transforms. For example suppose you want to transform format A -> format C, but don't > have a transform to do this. You might find a transform for A -> > B (i.e. in the RDDL document for A) and one for B -> C (in the RDDL document > for B) and then pipe A -> B -> C. Leigh has suggested that the "purpose" of an XSLT > ought be the resulting format (i.e. "nature"). Using this convention such > compilation of transforms is possible. I think this is a potentially very powerful technique as it allows one to take a further declarative 'step backwards', and define the desired output for a transformation without having to define the steps to get there, or indeed the location of the stylesheets. I think a TRaX based trial implementation for this should be fairly simple to implement (although obviously you'd want to limit the search depth that your engine uses). Also, granted multiple piped transforms will likely be sub-optimal compared to a single specialised transform. But I think experience has shown that pipes are very useful constructs. Cheers, L. -- Leigh Dodds, Systems Architect | "Pluralitas non est ponenda http://weblogs.userland.com/eclectic | sine necessitate" http://www.xml.com/pub/xmldeviant | -- William of Ockham XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
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