A weaker XSL? (Was: Storing Lots of Fiddly Bits )

[Clark Evans]

Tyler Baker wrote:
> In this case of XSL the spec enforces constraints which make it impossible 
> to be able to properly process an XML document unless it has been fully
> parsed into an in-memory tree structure (for most people this will be the DOM).

Wow!  Not what I had expected.  I guess I have much
to learn. *smile*  Anyway,

I have a negative-gut reaction to such a strong 
requirement.  It comes from being burned on many 
occassions -- it is very easy to underestimate the
memory size and processing time required to 
translate a stream into an object for further
minipulation.

Is there a possibility for creating a sub-set of 
XSL that would work on a stream instead of 
requiring a complete document object?

I picture a database doing all of the sorting
and other non-stream operations before/as the
XML is created.  Thus, the sub-set of XSL should 
be capable of being driven from a SAX equivalent
stream event observer.


:) Clark Evans

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)