Robert Koberg wrote:

It is amazing that no one has commented on this post. Perhaps it is because
the beta-omega developers do not want to show anything that contradicts the
alpha developer (fear of agora Siberia perhaps...).

Don't you worry about Siberia - everybody is free to think whatever he wants over here - but please keep in mind that not all devs are subscribed to the user list, and vice-versa. So no FUD spreading please.


In my very personal opinion, I'm not convinced one should use document() for aggregation purposes, since:

1) it hides away the aggregation instruction into an XSLT stylesheet, which might (or might not) be obvious to debug for somebody who isn't the original author.

2) theoretically, the non-document() methods of aggregation can be optimized not to create a full tree/table model of the document to be imported, which isn't the case using the document() function: a DOM-like in-memory representation will be created for both the imported and importing document. Using the include transformers, this might or might not be the case, i.e. the importing & imported document are SAX-streamed and no tree is built up (except when doing XPointer stuff with the XIncludeTransformer). Especialy for busy sites with large (aggregated) pages, this can make a huge difference.

HTH,

</Steven>
--
Steven Noels                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML            An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at            http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org                stevenn at apache.org


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to