RE: [transquery-discuss] XSLT as an XML update language

From: Bryan Rasmussen (bry@itnisk.com)
Date: Wed Dec 12 2001 - 10:07:58 CET


>>I thought that exsl:document provided what you wanted with "save"
>>functionality. I would be comfortable with saying that a database
>>environment (or document repository environment, whatever) only has
control
>>over its own environment--that queries that use exsl:document will be
scoped
>>to this environment and will create documents in the database. If you want
>>to create documents on the filesystem, then use another XSLT processor (or
>>at least another processing model). I guess I might not understand what
>>possible contradiction you're seeing.

Well it's just a matter of personal taste in how I'd want to program against
a Transquery Database.
If I'm accessing the Database from my chosen server-side environment, let's
assume an .asp or .jsp page, then I thought it could work to my advantage if
I could query the database, get a document returned, and use the document to
output something into the filesystem, obviously could do that from the .jsp
or .asp, but I figured it would be easier declaring a path using
xsl:document. Possible uses, creating an RSS newsfeed, RDF description of
different data accessed on the site, but residing in the database. I guess
I'd just prefer having, once I'm in the XSL-T, the control from there.

>>I'm interested in seeing your response to the non-exsl:document solution I
>>alluded to in the last paragraph or two of my email. Being able to avoid
>>requiring extensions would be a good thing, I think.
I'm personally agreed that avoiding extensions wherever possible is a good
thing, so I was all for the alluded solution. Since this is the group before
the official establishment of a group I figure we're just coming up with a
bunch of rough hunches, communal gut feelings as it were, as to how
Transquery would be most useful, and what would be the problems for the
official group to work through. So if there's something that seems to me to
be reasonable and I can't see anything against it, but I don't have anything
there to add, I just sit here and nod my agreement at the wisdom of it. Of
course nodding is not the most effective communication over email, should
probably learn to send emails saying I AGREE more often :)

anyway, now I must work, someone sent us an awful batch job where every
element is a child of the root, and they'd like it in
a table.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 22 2002 - 11:35:58 CET