Thanks for the good suggestions here. I had read the W3C specs several times, but bought the PXML2 book on Friday just to review. It definately improved my score in some areas, and was a nice addition to XML Bible which I'd been working from as well. My weakest area was testing and performance, as it was when I took the test back in January and failed. The only real trouble points were some of the poorly written (IMHO) questions. It continues to amaze me, how one's mind can draw a completely blank with something simple that I've done in practice dozens of times, (what ways can a new complex type can be derived?) and yet be fairly lucid in areas of complete trivia (namespace coercion), but that's what makes it a test! Now on to DB2!!!
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen all at once.
- Buckaroo Banzai
posted 17 years ago
What was lacking? Well, as I said, tuning and performance was my biggest problem, that is, stuff I didn't know. I got 50% in the category the first time and 66% the second time. To score well in this area, you have to understand why some parsers might have trouble with certain kinds of constructs in documents, you have to understand how and when node sets are calculated, and when and if xsl:variable can help speed things up or not. Using validating vs non-validating parses, and when you should and should not use them. That kind of thing. Tough test.
For my next feat, I will require a volunteer from the audience! Perhaps this tiny ad?
Two software engineers solve most of the world's problems in one K&R sized book