-
1. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
tfennelly May 6, 2009 5:31 AM (in response to kconner)Yeah... I think an XSL Action would be a very useful addition. I think the impl should support multiple Source types, defaulting to StreamSource.
Another option we could consider might be a FreeMarker Action which allows people to easily utilise FreeMarker's NodeModel functionality for processing XML. I think many people would prefer this as a templating solution, as an alternative to XSL. -
2. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
beve May 6, 2009 6:07 AM (in response to kconner)Another option we could consider might be a FreeMarker Action which allows people to easily utilise FreeMarker's NodeModel functionality for processing XML. I think many people would prefer this as a templating solution, as an alternative to XSL.
Yeah, I think a FreeMarker action would be really nice to have. -
3. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
tfennelly May 6, 2009 6:17 AM (in response to kconner)A specialized action for transforming CSV directly to a List/Map of objects of a specific type. This is supported in Smooks v1.2, but we could create a specialized ESB action that hides the underlying details of Smooks.
-
4. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
kconner May 6, 2009 6:33 AM (in response to kconner)I would like us to focus on enabling alternative engines in this posting, rather than adding specific specialisations.
So far we have XSL and FreeMarker to look at and, presumably, we can include the likes of velocity into the mix.
Kev -
5. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
burrsutter May 7, 2009 2:13 PM (in response to kconner)I agree with both XSL and Freemarker, we don't necessarily have to do both in this release, keeping in mind that we'll need to write docs for all the different options.
However, if Tom can think of some quick wins for out-of-the-box actions that make it super easy to use Smooks I think that could be valuable. It would depend on how hard it is to create & how easy it makes the user experience. -
6. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
tfennelly May 7, 2009 3:49 PM (in response to kconner)I do have some ideas for specializations that might make some use cases easier. Kevin doesn't want to discuss them here, so I'll wait untill he decides the appropriate topic/location for them.
-
7. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
ammppp May 7, 2009 9:32 PM (in response to kconner)xQuery would be nice in addition to XSLT. Some seem to find xQuery easier to write than XSLT.
-
8. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
tfennelly May 8, 2009 4:53 AM (in response to kconner)"ammppp" wrote:
xQuery would be nice in addition to XSLT. Some seem to find xQuery easier to write than XSLT.
Good idea... XQuery has been asked for on a few occasions. -
9. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
tfennelly May 8, 2009 5:01 AM (in response to kconner)"Kevin.Conner@jboss.com" wrote:
I would like us to focus on enabling alternative engines in this posting, rather than adding specific specialisations.
Transformation Actions to handle specific use cases -
10. Re: XSL and other transformation engines
kconner May 8, 2009 9:19 AM (in response to kconner)"tfennelly" wrote:
Kevin doesn't want to discuss them here, so I'll wait until he decides the appropriate topic/location for them.
Actually, Kevin wants this thread to stick to topic i.e. alternative transformation engines to smooks. -