xsl-list
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [xsl] Pattern Matching in XSl - find groups defined in one Xml in another Xml.

2012-08-23 05:08:00

Richard, given that groups are defined in the groups.xml file, where is the 
flexibility needed for a function?

A function wasn't my idea !
(Wendell's I think)

Isn't the flexibility found in the groups.xml file?

I think it probably is.


Thinking about it overnight I think I could get the search done by using two 
passes.  Firstly the RE (or key) based search we've already seem some examples 
of.  And then a second pass to check whether the groups have been found in 
thier entireties.

I'm about to try this latest example of yours.  At a very quick glance I think 
I can see two passes.


Hopefully,
Richard.


Richard Kerry
BNCS Engineer
T: +44 (0)20 82259063
M: +44 (0)7812 325518
Room EBX 301, BBC Television Centre, Wood Lane, London, W12 7RJ
richard(_dot_)kerry(_at_)atos(_dot_)net
uk.atos.net

This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for 
the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, 
please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be 
secured on the Internet, the Atos group liability cannot be triggered for the 
message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer 
virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is 
virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus 
transmitted.

________________________________________
From: G. Ken Holman [g(_dot_)ken(_dot_)holman(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com] on behalf 
of G. Ken Holman [gkholman(_at_)CraneSoftwrights(_dot_)com]
Sent: 22 August 2012 18:29
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com; 
xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [xsl] Pattern Matching in XSl - find groups defined in one  Xml in 
another Xml.

At 2012-08-22 12:21 -0400, Wendell Piez wrote:
Hi again,

On 8/22/2012 10:42 AM, G. Ken Holman wrote:
Ah, forgive my oversight. I missed the "all-ness" of the requirement.

I haven't yet worked out how your various solutions work so I can't
yet consider how I might make these changes.

Sounds like Wendell is on the right track and that his work would lead
to a more successful result since I missed such an important requirement
in my haste.

Hey no fair! Especially since I didn't address that (or any)
requirement directly. I only offered a way to refactor that isolates
the matching test in one place (a function), where it can be
understood and adjusted more easily.

Ha!  Okay ... I'll take back the problem for a solution.

Mind you, having finally solved the issue (I think!  Please tell me
if I'm wrong!), I ended up not feeling strongly about using a
function anywhere.

Richard, given that groups are defined in the groups.xml file, where
is the flexibility needed for a function?  Isn't the flexibility
found in the groups.xml file?

I've taken what I think is a very time-saving approach, first finding
the groups that are in the area, and only then walking over the area
alarms comparing each to the found groups.  That way I'm not
re-finding the found groups for every alarm, which I think is what
the function was doing.

I just can't figure out where function flexibility is needed ... I
cannot see what needs to be tweaked that isn't simply in the groups.xml file.

A transcript is below of what I hope is helpful this time
around.  Please let me know where I may have misunderstood the
requirements, especially for flexibility.  I hope the embedded
comments are helpful.

Apologies, again, for having jumped to the wrong solution in my earlier post.

. . . . . . . . . . . Ken

 
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>