[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
* Jeff Rafter <lists@jeffrafter.com> [2004-12-24 10:29]:
> >Then people could read up on it, rather than post messages like "I
> >heard through the grapevine that predicates generally don't work with
> >streaming". Then again, I suppose, it's fun to do analysis from
> >scratch. Ah well, whatever it is, it'll be good to see streaming
> >processors!
>
> I said what I said after reading the latest STX spec and only in the
> context of this discussion (which is "taming SAX"). I have to agree with
> Uche in saying that STXPath is very nice-- but may not be exactly what
> we are shooting for. Surely predicates are viable in many cases in
> partial scans such as:
>
> <foo>
> <bar>
> <baz/>
> </bar>
> <bar test="foo">
> <baz/>
> </bar>
> </foo>
>
> /foo/bar[@test="foo"]/baz
>
> But when considering /foo/bar[baz3="test"]/baz1
>
> <foo>
> <bar>
> <baz1/>
> <baz2/>
> <baz3>test</baz3>
> </bar>
> </foo>
>
> This predicate's value cannot be ascertained at the point of the baz1
> startElement event in a single event look ahead model. At least that is
> what I heard through the grapevine.
I was wondering...
Say the test was /foo/bar/[baz2="test"]/baz1
<foo>
<bar>
<baz1/>
<baz2>test</baz2>
<baz3/>
</bar>
</foo>
If your schema stated that the children were (baz1,baz2,baz3)
wouldn't you have enough information to know to surrender when
you reached baz3?
--
Alan Gutierrez - alan@engrm.com
|
