Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 11:26 -0400, David Lee wrote: [...] > Its > true that some work has been done with 'streamable xpath' that can avoid > this is some cases, but in general, the high level XML tools in general > (XPath, XQuery, XSLT etc) are based on an in-memory representation. > (ignoring XML Databases for the moment). "They're in memory except when they aren't"? The Working Groups designing XPath 2, XSLT 2 and XQuery 1 were very aware that the data model instances over which these languages operate might not be entirely in main memory... > Fortunately there is some awesome work going on to support streamable > subsets into XPath, XSLT and XQuery ... There are already streaming XQuery implementations (although I don't know any standalone ones that are developed actively today) > If you didn't have XPath you probably couldn't implement your "simpler" > solution any more efficiently, and would loose in flexibility. We do agree here ;-) Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.freenode.net irc.gnome.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
