[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Was: mode and moved to Namespaces
Am 18.04.2011 um 07:16 schrieb ac: > Yes I can create a dictionary like > <dic> > <word> > <instance xml:lang="en" gender="m">Mr</instance> > <instance xml:lang="en" gender="f">Mrs</instance> > <instance xml:lang="fr" gender="m">M.</instance> > <instance xml:lang="fr" gender="f">Mme</instance> > ... > </word> > </dic> > > but, given the proper namespace declarations, I could also have it as > <dic> > <word en:instance="Mr" en-f:instance="Mrs" fr:instance="M." fr-f:instance="Mme" ... /> > ... > </dic> IMO this is a good example why the perceived verbosity of some XML is a good thing. Regarding flexibility and future maintenance the first version has clear advantages: It requires almost no effort to add more languages, or more genders (if needed) or other attributes to the dictionary if needed, while the second version needs rules how to create new namespace names (and an expanded name for each) and requires updates to the validation schema for each change. I would rank maintainability if XML sources far higher than the number of nodes. Regarding performance of XSLT processors I dont think there is a difference if the correct keys are defined. - Michael -- _______________________________________________________________ Michael M|ller-Hillebrand: Dokumentation Technology Adobe Certified Expert, FrameMaker Consulting and Training, FrameScript, XML/XSL, Unicode Blog [de]: http://cap-studio.de/
|
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
|