"Wendell Piez" <wapiez(_at_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com> wrote in message
news:6(_dot_)0(_dot_)0(_dot_)22(_dot_)0(_dot_)20040219173918(_dot_)03581730(_at_)earthlink(_dot_)net(_dot_)(_dot_)(_dot_)
Dimitre--
At 05:22 PM 2/19/2004, you wrote:
I hope that the right term will prevail through being more frequently
used.
Me too. "Forward walk?"
Just "Tree walk"?
Generally terms like this are adopted either when someone comes up with a
really compelling name and it sticks, or someone thinks up something so
nifty and so useful that they wake up to find their own name on it. (Ask
Steve Muench, whose name will be mispronounced by users of XSLT 1.0
forevermore.)
But I don't recall who stole the forward walk from whom. I think I first
saw it from either Mike Kay, or Jeni. (Naturally.)
I have seen Jeni use tree walk several times and probably (don't remember)
she also used it the sense of replacement/analog to the classic identity
rule.
It's an interesting
technique since it's essentially taking the trouble to do explicitly what
the default traversal would do anyway, but allowing for particular
tactical
interventions (like testing or your counting).
This shows the benefits of trying to analyze into bits something that we are
accustomed doing automatically and as a one whole.
"Forced forward walk"? It
sounds like a pirate ship.
Nobody is being forced.
Maybe "micro-walk" or "serial-walk" ?
Cheers,
Wendell
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev [XML MVP],
FXSL developer, XML Insider,
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL
Resume: http://fxsl.sf.net/DNovatchev/Resume/Res.html
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list