[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: XSLT streaming: the processor "remembers" things a
It's certainly an imaginable situation to have a very deep document, but
very unusual. Is it for purely cultural reasons? For example in some
information-theoretic sense, this document might be said to encode a
sequence of nodes:
<a>1<a>2<a>3</a></a></a> in much the same way as this one: <doc><a>1</a><a>2</a><a>3</a></doc> just along a different axis (and without the need for the wrapping <doc> element). For some reason nobody seems to do that though. I suspect there are structural impediments (other than the streaming), or is it purely convention? To address Roger's original question though, you really often *do* want the ancestor info to be retained while streaming. Consider chunking a large book in which you'd like to include pointers back to the original document structure, and metadata from enclosing sections. That was exactly my use case when I hand-coded streaming processing using SAX, and I retained not only the ancestors but also /ancestor::*/preceding-sibling::* (to capture the metadata) -Mike , but the consequence of *not* rem On 11/20/2013 04:00 PM, Dimitre Novatchev wrote: On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I think it would be very interesting to see a survey of how deep XML documents go in the wild. Except for pathological cases, I think they would rarely go beyond 20 deep. Of course this will vary a great deal by document type.I think that what Roger points out is useful: probably the concept of "streaming" needs to be redefined and something needs to be specified about a limit of the "maximum document depth".
|
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
|