- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2016 17:37:07 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29984 --- Comment #2 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- I think the aim we should have is to widen the rules to those cases that can be statically assessed. Option (3), in comparison, is to "attempt streaming if you can", which we take as "optimistic streaming" (i.e., a user knows more of the data model than the processor does, so you can just try and see how it goes). The underlying proposal here would instead widen what I call "pessimistic streaming" (option 1), which means, only if you are dead certain you stream, and you have to be certain during static analysis, then you are *not required* to raise XTSE3430. Your proposal on "static rewrites" is wider than my proposal that only assesses cases where access to nodes is considered. I look forward to a discussion on this, perhaps we finally come to something that is both strict *and* allows processors a certain freedom in parsing and optimizing. This proposal may also make XSLT 3.0 more future proof. By cementing the rules we kinda prohibit advances in streamability and big data analysis with XSLT. By allowing leniency, new research, real-world scenarios and processors playing catch-up with one another can advance the applicability of streaming XSLT and (big) data mining in general. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 6 November 2016 17:37:14 UTC