Re: [xslt] xsltproc memory consumption w/ large DTD / docbook

On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 11:50:38AM +0000, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> >   I stand firm on this. 
> > 
> > > a simply well-formed document <x foo="bar"/>
> > > can have an XSLT process it under the assumption that "bar" is
> > > an entity (defined in the DTD subset)
> > 
> >   and need to map back to the system ID for that entity hence requiring
> > the entity declaration from the DTD. Please recheck the spec, I'm 95%
> > sure about this (but there is those 5% ...)
> yes, but the entity declaration can be in a DTD subset, and there need
> not be a full DTD. do we we agree
>  <!DOCTYPE article [
>     <!ENTITY foo "bar">
>  ]>
>  <article>&foo;</article>
> is reasonable XML?

  it does not allow validation of the fragment, as a result not very
reasonable for a publishing use IMHO.

> >   No, it will be read for every instance, even if XIncluded. As long
> > as the separate chunk references the DocBook DTd (and they do !) 
> but those instance documents don't have to have DTD declarations.
> if they need entities, they can use the technique above, but
> I'd suggest that most people should move away from entities anyway.

  not for character entity definitions in publishing space, there is
no replacement and charrefs are not meaninful to a human brain.

> If I was working in this scenario, I'd have one wrapper file
> for the whole site, XInlcuding all the individual files, which
> would simply be well-formed. I'd validate those using a schema.

  We are still for docbook publishing working in a DTD based framework.
XInclude is fine, though, because it allows to DTD validate the fragments.


Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network  | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit | Rpmfind RPM search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]