On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 2:43 AM Michael Kay mike(_at_)saxonica(_dot_)com
<xsl-list-service(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com> wrote:
...
Secondly, I found it useful recently to split the mode for evaluating
assertions into two: one mode handles the case where the test produces a
normal result, the other handles the case where it produces a dynamic error,
and we issue a different apply-templates instruction for the two cases. The
reason for this is that the two modes have different default behaviour (the
mode that handles error outcomes returns "false" for all assertions except
the one with match="error"): this change eliminated a lot of logic. Perhaps
the same effect could have been achieved using a generic template rule
delegating to specific template rules using next-match; but in this scenario
where we're basically handling a two-dimensional decision tree (X - what is
the outcome of a test?, Y - what is the assertion being tested?) then using
modes for one of the dimensions and match patterns for the other can be
useful.
Thank you for identifying the conceptual framework I've been using for
a long time in XSLT. This concept of segmenting the dimensionality of
the problem with modes taking the dimension which appears more
'enumerated' and the match taking the more 'continuous-like'. That's
what I've been doing, but didn't really recognize it until mentioned.
- Brian
I would find it quite difficult to capture this experience and produce
general guidance on XSLT coding/design patterns; but if you're writing
complex stylesheets, modes are a powerful tool at your disposal and can be
used with care to great effect.
Michael Kay
XSL-List info and archive
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
EasyUnsubscribe: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/unsub/xsl-list/1167547
or by email: xsl-list-unsub(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
--~--