Re: MS chat tidbits

> On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Jon Smirl wrote:
> 
> > We better not see a patent on this, I've been using streamed SAX XSL
> > processing with XT for over a year now. This has been a feature of XT since
> > the day it was released. XSL has never had a requirement that the input or
> > output of the processor be actual trees only abstract ones. There is also
> > prior art on compiling an XSL sheet where a schema describes the input and
> > using the schema to improve the compilation.
> 
> IIRC, XT simply uses the SAX stream to create it's own internal tree
> structure. It's not a streaming XSLT implementation.

I think both views are consistent with MS ... messy ... 'technical' ... 
info...

XT is streaming in a sense that XSLProcessorImpl is actually 
SAXParser  ;-) 

<cut>

import org.xml.sax.Parser;
public interface XSLProcessor extends Parser {
}

public class XSLProcessorImpl implements XSLProcessor, Cloneable, ParameterSet {

</cut>


Does it mean XT is  'streaming' ?  Yes. SAXParser  is 'streaming' 
by definition. 

Has it memory footprint? Yes, because this 'SAXParser'  is very 
special, it loads the entire document into memory.

Is MS talking about *this* memory footprint or about some other memory 
footprint ?

No way to answer.  

We can only guess what do they mean, because having XSLT engine in form of 
SAXParser already saves some memory. Not "that much", but ...

Rgds.Paul.

PS. Streaming XSLT is doable, but it is hardly 'one man project'. 
It is 2-man-year project. But  weekends are too short.




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