• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Learning XML/XSL/Xpath/Xquery...

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by scotspine
    "but even then, if you've already got the whole DOM tree loaded then XPath is a lot more convenient" - that's true but the whole point is to avoid having to do that if poss. (load into an xmldocument). a recent problem was having to extract a repeating series of nodes from a large document which contained many documents and stick them all (the subsets) into oracle. was faster using a reader.
    In that case it would be faster using a SAX parser.
    Listen to my last album on Spotify

    Comment


      #12
      Problem with extensions is that it breaks the whole point of XSL - abstract yourself from particular language, if you hack with C# in it then you might as well as stick to C#.

      Using string functions for simple matching in XmlReader might be faster indeed, but it might be that they use Xpath internally for that anyway - generally speaking I'd say if there are performance constraints on any code that deals with XML/XSL then in this case either custom parsing should be used or XML/XSL should be dropped altogether.

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by AtW
        Problem with extensions is that it breaks the whole point of XSL - abstract yourself from particular language, if you hack with C# in it then you might as well as stick to C#.

        Using string functions for simple matching in XmlReader might be faster indeed, but it might be that they use Xpath internally for that anyway - generally speaking I'd say if there are performance constraints on any code that deals with XML/XSL then in this case either custom parsing should be used or XML/XSL should be dropped altogether.

        what mix c# and html........hmmmm
        whats the lowest you can do this for?

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by HankWangford
          what mix c# and html........hmmmm
          They call it ASPX I think...

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by AtW
            They call it ASPX I think...

            ah the tulipe with '<%' directive actually in the aspx file rather than the code behind class file.
            C'mon atw keep the abstraction

            You must be one of the Mixed Verbose Code design pattern fans
            Last edited by HankWangford; 2 March 2007, 21:32.
            whats the lowest you can do this for?

            Comment


              #16
              I don't use ASPX - I have my own simple scripting language with interpreter written in C#, it is very fast and does not depend on IIS - it depends on my own mini webserver written also in C#

              Comment


                #17
                His name is David Pawson!

                I have found this site invaluable over the years: http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/index.html

                XSL/T is quite tricky to get into if your head is wired for "normal" programming activities but there are some pretty good explanations and real world examples here as well as some more advanced techniques.

                Hope this helps.

                Comment


                  #18
                  http://www.amazon.co.uk/Beginning-XS...869636&sr=11-1
                  I found this book invaluable to me to learn the basics of XSLT. I found her writing style really easy to follow,
                  threenine.co.uk
                  Cultivate, Develop & Sustain Innovation

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X