[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@qub.com>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 15:56:56 -0800
> > If you have to "dig" into the contents to figure
> > out which "processing pipeline" the content is
> > placed on then you have effectively elminated
> > all hope of sequential processing. Thus, you
> > need random access to the information stream.
> > And hence, "large" memory requiremens, thus
> > undermining the apparant "simplicity" of SML.
> >
>
> Well, I don't agree with you on this point. I have been working
> on a streaming query processor for XML for some time, and the
> problem is just not there. Why is it a problem going into the
> element one or two levels deep? Besides the chances that you will
> encode all the information relevant to the query processor into
> attributes is very small. Consider the example above with the
> local schools: what if I want to select all homes that have
> some specific school in their neighborhood? This information
> cannot be encoded in the attributes, since its nested. But I
> can still stream such queries, all I have to do is descend one
> level into each element and the find the school that satisfies
> the condition.
This is exactly the point. Attributes kludge allows easier
processing when the hierarchy has only one level and
*only* in this situation.
<foo><att>Attr</att></foo> - when processing it with SAX
no easy way to implement the 'look-forward' rule of kind
'If foo has a child ( property ) Attr'
<foo att="Attr"></foo> - when processing it with SAX
it is easy to implement the 'look-forward' rule of kind
'If foo has a child ( property ) Attr'
As any other kludge, attributes kludge allows you
to process some percent of more easily than
without that klugde.
Like any other kludge even it gives you something,
it costs something.
I think what it gives is not worth what it costs. Your mileage
may vary, but for sure there is no logical arguments here.
" Does this kludge simplyfy some things? - Yes it does.
Does it makes some other things harder? - Yes it does."
What is more important?
We can only guess, because if some developer is concentrated
only on processing some simple XML documents with SAX -
for sure Attributes kludge is very convinient.
Developer who tries to invent the new XQL ( with updates ;-)
may have another point of view on this subject.
I don't know who is closer to the 'truth' ;-)
Not talking about the changes one should make
to the SAX handler ( XT stylesheet e t.c. ) in the situation
when something designed to be attribute turns into element.
Rgds.Paul.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|