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

Re: What's your visual metaphor for XSL Transformation

Subject: Re: What's your visual metaphor for XSL Transformations?
From: "bryan rasmussen" <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:37:44 +0100
Re:  What's your visual metaphor for XSL Transformation
On 3/23/07, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 3/23/07, bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Okay 2 things here;
>
> 1.
> I would like the examples of these things. Not because I don't believe
> they exist but because I would like to see if there are some I hadn't
> thought of before (is this 2.0 we're talking about, probably give lots
> more examples that way)

You are not saying exactly which "these things".

I guess I meant: > People are seriouly considering XSLT transformations that implement
fundamenal (and non-stop) server-side logic.
I inferred non-stop to mean a transformation that was running
continually, not one that was started with each GET for example

There are plenty of XSLT 1.0 examples of useful transformations that
do not need/use a source xml document.

Take for example Jeni's famous stylesheets that you have to
double-click on their names in Windows Explorer in order to get them
going.

Okay haven't seen these but I suppose that it is done with the processing instruction with the stylesheet calling itself. This is a nice hack yes, but by my definition of input document it still needs an input document.





To be more precise, it is a transformation that can be *unlimited, or indefinite* in time, not the transformation engine.

sorry I didn't read your post as meaning a transformation that takes however long it needs to complete its calculation. From your language I assumed a transformation that was never assumed to stop, that ran forever and output a stream of markup. Let's say a Jabber bot that runs against itself. Of course I immediately thought, well that might cause problems.


> > Just to repeat:
> >
> >   There are no technical or practical reasons why a transformation
> > should not be unlimited in time.

the practical reasons have to do with what your hardware or processor can handle I suppose, or maybe how long a human being can wait to get the result of a calculation, but I agree that unlimited when meaning until the calculation is complete is fine, unlimited when assumed to mean running continually would be something different.

By the way, I don't know if you took it as such but this was not meant
to be an attack on using XSL-T for innovative things it is supposed
generally not meant for, especially as I have probably done quite a
bit of that, it was looking to see if you had some examples I wasn't
aware of. I am aware of FXSL and follow it quite a bit.

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen

Current Thread

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.