[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: [xsl] Q on incremental processing and count()
Subject: Re: [xsl] Q on incremental processing and count() From: Enke Michael <Michael.Enke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:24:32 +0100 |
Hi Andrew, the problem is not the browser, it is the xslt-machine. May be this is the wrong list for my request and I have to ask the people how programmed Xalan-j Regards, Michael Andrew Welch wrote: > > Hi, > > If you are having problems with slow tables in IE, try using spans and divs > instead - IE is able to draw these much more quickly. > > For example: > > <table> becomes <div> > <tr> becomes <div> > <td> becomes <span> > > You will need to do a little work to sort out the column widths, but that > will depend on your setup. > > (although, really, a 200 item table shouldnt cause too many problems) > > cheers > > andrew > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Enke Michael > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 2:31 PM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [xsl] Q on incremental processing and count() > > Joerg Heinicke wrote: > > > > Hello Michael, > > > > it's not clear what you want to do. Your variables are ok, no problems to > > see. You only can shorten them: > > > > <xsl:variable name="col-num" select="10"/> > > > > <xsl:variable name="col-num" select="count(thead/th-row)"/> > > > > <xsl:variable name="col-num" select="count(thead[1]/th-row)"/> > > > > Between the two last declarations there should be no difference, because > of > > your XML. > > > > But what exactly is the problem? What's the result you get and you expect? > > What's the context of the variable declaration? > > > > Regards, > > > > Joerg > > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > > My problem is the execution speed. > I have a large table (200 entries) and split them into small tables (per > table 20 entries, every subtable with the same table header). > My problem is: The browser gets the result if all 200 entries are processed > in > the memory! Arrrrgggg... > But I expected to see the tables as they come out of the database. > Because for investigating I made it so, that every item needs half a second > to be generated. > I expected to see the first sub table after 20*0.5 seconds, the second table > after 2*20*0.5 seconds and so on. > But actually I see all tables not before 200*0.5 seconds :-( > > If I remove the count() and ...following-sibling... I lost my > table structure but I can see how the values come out as they > were produced. > > Regards, > Michael > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Q on incremental processi, Andrew Welch | Thread | Re: [xsl] Q on incremental processi, Joerg Heinicke |
RE: [xsl] xsl:copy, Jarno . Elovirta | Date | Re: [xsl] Q on incremental processi, Enke Michael |
Month |