Hi folks,
I'm going to be turning my hands to the XSLT 2.0 stylesheets for
DocBook again soon, partly with an eye towards making them more
production ready, partly to try a few experiments.
When I set out on the XSLT 2.0 reimplementation, I had in mind a
design where there'd be a normalization
Hi Norm and all,
My opinion on the subject is that we should try listing the cases (like
/section/info/title) why the first step is required.
And then see if the schema could not be simplified to make that first
step unnecessary.
I have found that this kind of choice is often confusing for the
inlines you'll never use.
David
-Original Message-
From: Camille Bégnis [mailto:cami...@neodoc.biz]
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:11 AM
To: docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Rethinking XSLT 2.0 design
Hi Norm and all,
My opinion on the subject
Norman Walsh wrote:
1. It's very expensive. The entire document gets processed at least
twice. While the idea of simplifying the downstream design seemed
very attractive, I think the cost is too high.
I think that multiple passes over document are necessary anyway -- I
think that profiling
2. It doesn't actually simplify things. Oh, in theory it
does, but in
practice, it's harder to debug because the document you're
looking at
isn't actually the one being styled.
That's true.
One useful thing would be to have a debug switch which that causes the
xslts to spit out
Hi Norm,
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 4:59 AM, Norman Walsh n...@nwalsh.com wrote:
I'm going to be turning my hands to the XSLT 2.0 stylesheets for
DocBook again soon, partly with an eye towards making them more
production ready, partly to try a few experiments.
Thanks for clarifying that you'll
