On Tue, May 1, 2012 1:04 pm, David Carlisle wrote:
On 01/05/2012 12:49, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
I will take the following as an axiom:
Programs written to process XML should be implemented in XSLT.
...
The entire argument appears spurious, so it seems fruitless to try to
argue specific points.
Why would anyone even try to do this, even if it were possible, it would
To "[s]ee examples of what XSLT should never have been made to do." [1],
apparently.
How quickly we forget: [2].
be vast amounts of work and would just produce an xslt engine that is
slower than the one you started with.
From [3]:
Naxos is very slow and memory-hungry. Stylesheets larger than
toy-sized will probably fail to run even if you specify a large
heap for the JVM with -Xmx.
Regards,
Tony Graham tgraham(_at_)mentea(_dot_)net
Consultant http://www.mentea.net
Mentea 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming
[1] http://osdcpapers.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.84/prod.40
[2]
http://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/200701/msg00553.html
[3] http://futzle.com/users/debbiep/naxos/naxos.html
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--