xinclude syntax changed?

[Torsten Curdt <tc...@dff.st>]

I just upgraded from cocoon 1.7.5 to 1.8 and realized
my xinclude processing seems not to work anymore.

Is the syntax <xinclude:include parse="xml" href="test.xml"/>
not valid anymore? I've looked into the examples and found
<include xinclude:parse="xml" xinclude:href="test.xml"/>
which seems to work.
--
Torsten

Re: xinclude speed

[Stephen Fleischman <sf...@rsn.hp.com>]

Donald Ball wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Stephen Fleischman wrote:
> 
> > I've experimented with using an external entitity versus xinclude
> > to maintain a standard template using Cocoon 1.8.
> > The processing time was 621 milliseconds with the external entity
> > and 1473 without.  The only difference in the files were the minimal
> > changes needed to use the external entity or the xinclude semantics;
> > a change to the included file since with xinclude the included file
> > had to have a root element which resulted in having to refer to
> > the elements in the xslt file by parent-node/child-node.
> >
> > Is using xinclude generally slower than using an external entity?
> 
> almost certainly, yes. entities are expanded by xerces as it builds the
> DOM, while xincludes are processed at the cocoon layer. however, once the
> pages are in the cache, read times should be relatively small for both
> methods. are your numbers for the first time the page has been hit or
> after it's in cocoon's cache?
> 

The timing numbers were for the first time the page was hit. After that
the cached times were in the 30 millisecond range.

- Stephen Fleischman

Re: xinclude speed

[Donald Ball <ba...@webslingerZ.com>]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Stephen Fleischman wrote:

> I've experimented with using an external entitity versus xinclude
> to maintain a standard template using Cocoon 1.8.
> The processing time was 621 milliseconds with the external entity
> and 1473 without.  The only difference in the files were the minimal
> changes needed to use the external entity or the xinclude semantics;
> a change to the included file since with xinclude the included file
> had to have a root element which resulted in having to refer to
> the elements in the xslt file by parent-node/child-node.
> 
> Is using xinclude generally slower than using an external entity?

almost certainly, yes. entities are expanded by xerces as it builds the
DOM, while xincludes are processed at the cocoon layer. however, once the
pages are in the cache, read times should be relatively small for both
methods. are your numbers for the first time the page has been hit or
after it's in cocoon's cache?

> Also, I was getting about 400 milliseconds for the external entity
> version using Cocoon 1.7.4. Is this slowdown typical?

probably due to the newer version of xerces included with cocoon-1.8. i
cannot speak to why it would be the case.

- donald

xinclude speed

[Stephen Fleischman <sf...@rsn.hp.com>]

I've experimented with using an external entitity versus xinclude
to maintain a standard template using Cocoon 1.8.
The processing time was 621 milliseconds with the external entity
and 1473 without.  The only difference in the files were the minimal
changes needed to use the external entity or the xinclude semantics;
a change to the included file since with xinclude the included file
had to have a root element which resulted in having to refer to
the elements in the xslt file by parent-node/child-node.

Is using xinclude generally slower than using an external entity?

Also, I was getting about 400 milliseconds for the external entity
version using Cocoon 1.7.4. Is this slowdown typical?


Thanks

Stephen Fleischman

Re: xinclude syntax changed?

[Donald Ball <ba...@webslingerZ.com>]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Torsten Curdt wrote:

> I just upgraded from cocoon 1.7.5 to 1.8 and realized
> my xinclude processing seems not to work anymore.
> 
> Is the syntax <xinclude:include parse="xml" href="test.xml"/>
> not valid anymore? I've looked into the examples and found
> <include xinclude:parse="xml" xinclude:href="test.xml"/>
> which seems to work.

right, this is in the changelog - i upgraded the xinclude processor to
conform to the latest working draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/xinclude). note
that the draft contains this statement:

While the WG has decided to publish this working draft, outstanding issues
remain as noted in the draft. Especially note the change from an
element-based syntax to an attribute-based syntax. This change is being
revisited by the WG and feedback is specifically solicited on this issue.

Comments on this document should be sent to
www-xml-xinclude-comments@w3.org , which is publicly archived. While we
welcome implementation experience reports, the XML Core Working Group will
not allow early implementation to constrain its ability to make changes to
this specification prior to final release.

so if you have any comments on the xinclude syntax, you know where to go.

- donald