[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: Standard API to XSL processors
Subject: Re: Standard API to XSL processors From: James Clark <jjc@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:37:07 +0700 |
Tyler Baker wrote: > If someone has to build a DOM > tree, write it out to a stream which is then piped into an XSL Processor and > reparsed, that is an extra indirection of inefficiency that in the real world > would knock out a lot of the potential benefits of a standard XSL API. But if you write it out to a SAX DocumentHandler rather than a OutputStream or a Writer you don't have this inefficiency. Always writing out to the DOM is seriously inefficient. In many cases it would double the amount of memory you need (two trees in memory, rather than one). Building a DOM tree is *expensive* especially in Java. If you have to choose one kind of output, a SAX DocumentHandler is the most efficient choice. It means you have little overhead whatever you want to do: - write the XML an OutputStream - write the XML to Writer - run another SAX filter - build a DOM tree Any other choice introduces substantial overhead in some of those four cases. James XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Standard API to XSL processors, Tyler Baker | Thread | Re: Standard API to XSL processors, Tyler Baker |
dl/dt/dd matching, Francois Belanger | Date | Re: Standard API to XSL processors, Tyler Baker |
Month |