RE: Latest XSLTMark benchmark

Everyone: the XSLTMark 2.0 results page has been updated to explain the
error, and we have also contacted xml.com.

Forward to what should be done:

> I do think that the benchmark should be measuring parsing plus
> transformation plus serialization, because that is the most typical usage
> scenario, and because if you don't measure that, a processor that
> optimizes
> parsing or serialization based on knowledge of the stylesheet
> gets no credit
> for it.

These are persuasive points, especially when it comes to some of the
next-generation optimizations. Do any other XSLT implementors have an
opinion on "parse+transform" vs. "transform only"?

Kevin also correctly points out the usefulness of measuring memory
consumption. This is even trickier to do right (although we have done some
internal tests), but would be a very useful metric. Presumably one would
express it as "kilobyte per kilobyte", where the first kilobyte is input
size and the second one is heap size delta -- measuring "memory efficiency"
of a processor.


\\ Eugene Kuznetsov
\\ eugene@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
\\ DataPower Technology, Inc.


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