- From: Norm Tovey-Walsh <norm@saxonica.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 10:23:39 +0100
- To: Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-xslt-40@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m27d1vd945.fsf@saxonica.com>
Mukul Gandhi <gandhi.mukul@gmail.com> writes: > From my point of view, I think that, having a large body of > streaming/performance related recommendations within main body of the > spec, makes the primary functional intent of the spec, difficult to > comprehend. If we wanted to split streamability into a separate spec, as a practical matter, I wonder what would change? I opened up the 3.0 spec and searched for “streaming”. * One might possibly move 2.11, 2.12, and 2.13 to a new spec * Section 4.6 could probably be moved Then we get to 6.6.1 where xsl:mode has a “streamable” attribute. What do we do here (and in all the similar places)? 1. We could remove the “streamable” attribute from the tableaux and all mentions of it from the description of xsl:mode. On the one hand, that would make the spec “simpler” for readers who want to ignore streaming. But what happens when a user comes across a stylesheet that has a “streaming” attribute on xsl:mode? That’s confusing. Also, what does the streamability spec do? Does it reproduce the entire tableaux, or does it just include the new attribute(s)? If it’s the entire tableaux, does it include the descriptions of all the attributes, or just the new ones? If it’s just the new ones, readers have to look at both specs to understand what attributes are actually available. 2. If we leave the “streamable” attribute in the tableaux, then we surely have to leave the descriptions in place. So now the spec isn’t “simpler” for the reader who wants to ignore streaming, but at least everything is in one place. Neither of those options seems ideal to me. There are other paragraphs that mention streaming, and I suppose one might like to excise them all. But I fear that’s going to make streaming *a lot* harder to describe and understand. On balance, my feeling tends towards the view that it’s a language specification, not a user’s guide. I remain of the opinion that it would be very difficult to justify expending the editorial effort required to split the spec. And on reviewing what it would mean, I’m not at all persuaded that the result would really be of benefit. If what the world needs is a “XSLT 4.0 User’s Guide for Users Who Don’t Care about Streaming”, maybe we should pesuade Mike to write one (/me ducks). Be seeing you, norm -- Norm Tovey-Walsh Saxonica
Received on Thursday, 22 September 2022 09:58:03 UTC