* Alan <alan-saxon-JbsJTiZCByIAvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2005-04-27 20:01]:
> I'd like a more robust inclusion mechanism for my pipeline
> engine, and I've been reading over XPointer and XInclude. I'm
> wondering if anyone has attempted to adapt Saxon as an XInclude
> tranformer. From what I can tell, it seems like it would be very
> easy to implement the xmlns() and element() schemes, though
> xpointer(), scheme is a little confusing, and seems to duplicate
> a lot of functionality found in XPath 2.0.
> Would be easier to simply write an inclusion engine that uses XPath?
Yes. It was very simple. The include engine I wrote allows for a
XPath fragment. I then use Saxon's XPath engine. Does everything
I've needed so far.
Now I want to hack a Saxon OM that will follow these includes
transparently, so I don't have to materialize an included document.
Any interest?
--
Alan Gutierrez - alan-JbsJTiZCByIAvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- http://engrm.com/blogometer/index.html
- http://engrm.com/blogometer/rss.2.0.xml
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tell us your software development plans!
Take this survey and enter to win a one-year sub to SourceForge.net
Plus IDC's 2005 look-ahead and a copy of this survey
Click here to start! http://www.idcswdc.com/cgi-bin/survey?id=105hix
|
