[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
Re: ***SPAM*** [xml-dev] Representing binary trees in XML=?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=A6?= flat versus recursive
- From: "Liam R. E. Quin" <liam@fromoldbooks.org>
- To: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@mitre.org>, "xml-dev@lists.xml.org" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 16:46:17 -0400
On Thu, 2019-07-04 at 13:45 +0000, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> Are there other ways to represent binary trees in XML?
Many. But it's mostly in the details; stand-off markup (flat) and
directly nested are the two most common. Note that arbitrary graph
structures can't be descried as pure trees, so you need either a hybrid
approach or (simplest) the flat/standoff approach.
> Of the two ways to represent binary trees shown above, which way is
> easier to process with XSLT? Which way is easier to process with
> other programming languages?
It doesn't make much difference. The id/idref approach allows for
indexed access.
> If you have used the recursive approach, have you encountered
> problems with XML parsers failing on deeply nested elements?
Years ago, yes (with SGML too).
But tail recursion, where available, usually eliminates that.
Liam
--
Liam Quin, https://www.delightfulcomputing.com/
Upcoming courses: DocBook (sold out)
CSS for XML People, DC area, USA: August
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]