Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces
2011-04-18 08:34:56
Hi Michael,
Valid point.
Assuming 2 gender, 10 languages, and 10K words, version 2 requires 20
namespaces and 210K nodes, while version 1 requires no namespace and
810Knodes, in addition to common overhead. Keys apply in both cases,
although with a theoretical 25% size factor advantage for version 2.
Also, every dictionary check will require that version 1 passes two
parameters instead of one, as well as matches two attributes, instead of
retrieving the properly named one, although keys can contribute to
reduce this last retrieval factor difference.
As for maintenance, adding an additional language involves adding a new
namespace definition for version 2 and substantially more editing and
data entry for version 1. Adding a new word is also somewhat simpler in
version 2. But we are now getting into verbosity-related issues, which
may not be important factors, except for their associated typo increase
factor.
Overall, it is a trade of, but it seems that the namespace approach is
not only valid, it is more efficient, possibly by about 400% in terms of
space, in the given example, implying that it may be worth considering
and supporting. The validity and support of version 1 was not
questioned or at stake. The main issues was the support for version 2,
as well as the usefulness of namespaces, and the fact that 80 namespaces
in a stylesheet can be quite natural and not so out of bounds or silly.
Weren't namespaces designed to be used? If so, why avoid them at all
costs, especially in cases of natural conceptual namespaces?
Regards,
ac
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 don’t think there is a difference if
the correct keys are defined.
- Michael
--
_______________________________________________________________
Michael Müller-Hillebrand: Dokumentation Technology
Adobe Certified Expert, FrameMaker
Consulting and Training, FrameScript, XML/XSL, Unicode
Blog [de]: http://cap-studio.de/
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail:<mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: [xsl] mode, (continued)
- Re: [xsl] mode, Andrew Welch
- Re: [xsl] mode, Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex
- Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Brandon Ibach
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Liam R E Quin
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Michael Müller-Hillebrand
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces,
ac <=
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Michel Hendriksen
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Jirka Kosek
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Michel Hendriksen
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Jirka Kosek
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Jirka Kosek
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, ac
- Re: Was: [xsl] mode and moved to Namespaces, Abel Braaksma
|
|
|