This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
trax and sax. Re: Accessing a node name from within <xsl:attribute>
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: trax and sax. Re: Accessing a node name from within <xsl:attribute>
- From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul at qub dot com>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:26:01 -0700
- Organization: The Qub Group
- References: <93CB64052F94D211BC5D0010A800133101FDEF88@wwmess3.bra01.icl.co.uk>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
> > > > Because I'm a developer who is using XT as embedded
> > > > engine, and because TraX lacks SAX mode which XT has -
> > > > to me there is simply no question what should be used
> > > > as embeddable engine - only XT ;-)
> > I'm using TRAX in the sense of http://trax.openxml.org .
> >
> [Kay Michael] Then I'm puzzled,
> (a) because TRAX architecture is
> very much based on the concept of SAX filters
.. but trax.Processor is not "extends org.xml.sax.Parser" ( that's
what XSLProcessorImpl is in XT )
Yes, there is Transformer extends org.xml.sax.XMLFilter , but
it is based on SAX2 ( which I don't think I'l ever use... I also hardly
belive I'l ever use DOM ... )
Also:
<quote>
This object represents a Transformer, which is a SAX2 XMLFilter.
An object of this class can not be used concurrently over
multiple threads.
</quote>
... but I don't see a sign of clone() there.
To me this all means that the API is a bit hypotetical ( and
too complex for stupid human being ( me ) to understand
and use ).
> and (b) because as far as I
> know TRAX is currently a paper specification with no implementations, so you
> don't actually have the option of using it as an alternative to XT.
At the moment each XSLT engine has it's own API for embedding.
Current XT API allow me to knock Ux ( which is a container
for chained SAX1 components ) easily not changing a line of XT
code.
I can do the same with other XSLT engines but it will be
not that easy with their current APIs.
For some reasons all the vendors of 'other' XSLT
engines ( except XT ) announced that in the future they'll
provide unified API for embedding their XSLT engines
( called TRAX ).
That "future API" still lacks some features which are already
implemented in XT ( providing me with tons of APIs
which I don't need at all and don't understand if I need
them in the future ).
That's why to me there is simply no question what should
be used as embeddable engine - only XT, which already
has convenient and simple API (missing not only in current,
but even in the future versions of other engines).
Rgds.Paul.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list