On 11/17/06, Nestor Urquiza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I do not think XSLT is fragile at all and specially
for XML Transformations I prefer it over any DOM or
SAX API approach. There are interesting efforts and
results like uml2svg [1] (to visualize XMI it uses an
XSLT[2]) in this area btw.
In any case while both solutions (with and without
XSLT) could be fine, with the XSLT one you get the
advantage of separation of concerns between the XML
Mapping (XMI to SCXML) and the graphical tool you
select to use. In that way of course changes to the
specification do not affect the work you do for any of
the specific plugin implementations (You need a plugin
for each single modelling tool you want to use able to
convert from specific graphical solution to XMI).
<snip/>
Correct, its one per modeling tool, and thats a drawback. I have
nothing against others taking the XSLT approach, clearly as you show,
others are having good success with it. Might come down to personal
preference.
-Rahul
Thanks,
-Nestor
[1] http://uml2svg.sourceforge.net/
[2] http://freshmeat.net/projects/xmi2svg/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
