[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: build your own transform (RE: infinite depth to namespaces)
- From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:25:45 -0500
For HLALs, it's vital. I would think that
transforms to different target languages would
be non-controversial. Downtranslation is the
key to enabling authors to work in different
levels of abstraction, or am I missing your
point here?
Len
http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
-----Original Message-----
From: Simon St.Laurent [mailto:simonstl@simonstl.com]
On 30 Aug 2001 17:38:30 -0700, Michael Brennan wrote:
> And none of the protestations on this list (or anywhere else) will ever
stop
> me from doing whatever transformations or filtering on a document instance
> that suit my applications' needs. And if I need to, I'll even write a SAX
> filter that changes element names! <shudder/> ;-)
That's on my to-do list as well, promise! (Same for attributes.)
It's pretty easy to modify the namespace filter rules to change element
names in-addition-to/in-place-of modifying the namespace. It's
occasionally useful for transforms between similar vocabularies, like a
single abstract vocabulary expressed in different natural languages.
As always, at your own risk...