<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Transforming Open XML Documents to Flat OPC Format</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/ericwhite/archive/2008/09/29/transforming-open-xml-documents-to-flat-opc-format.aspx</link><description>[Blog Map] Transforming Open XML documents using XSLT is an interesting scenario, but before we can do so, we need to convert the Open XML document into the Flat OPC format. We then perform the XSLT transform, producing a new file in the Flat OPC format,</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Transforming Open XML Documents to Flat OPC Format</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/ericwhite/archive/2008/09/29/transforming-open-xml-documents-to-flat-opc-format.aspx#8992389</link><pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 06:15:33 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8992389</guid><dc:creator>unruledboy</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;how can we tranform it directly to html file?&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>Important Safety Tip for Office Open XML - Flatten Your Package!</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/ericwhite/archive/2008/09/29/transforming-open-xml-documents-to-flat-opc-format.aspx#9015720</link><pubDate>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 07:36:39 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9015720</guid><dc:creator>John Holliday, MVP Office SharePoint Server 2007</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Important Safety Tip for Office Open XML - Flatten Your Package!&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: Transforming Open XML Documents to Flat OPC Format</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/ericwhite/archive/2008/09/29/transforming-open-xml-documents-to-flat-opc-format.aspx#9901611</link><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:15:42 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9901611</guid><dc:creator>romeok</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I think that code for chuking a string into 76 char lengths is nuts. It does give an example of how interesting the new language features are, but the example is inappropriate. Simple loop will be easier to read and take less code to write.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: Transforming Open XML Documents to Flat OPC Format</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/ericwhite/archive/2008/09/29/transforming-open-xml-documents-to-flat-opc-format.aspx#9901775</link><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:13:44 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9901775</guid><dc:creator>EricWhite</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Romeok,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;You're right, in this scenario, you could re-write with a loop. &amp;nbsp;Because of the design of the Open XML SDK (and System.IO.Packaging underneath), we're forced into an imperative approach here. &amp;nbsp;But in other scenarios, when writing pure functional transforms, writing a loop would move the code from expression context to statement context, and would mean either refactoring, having a locally impure method, or would make the code impure, which leads to a bunch of problems, including possibilities of bugs introduced by mixing imperative/declarative code, and eliminates the easy use of multiple processors. &amp;nbsp;I guess that I'm in the habit of chunking using the functional approach, and used it even though in this scenario, the code wouldn't suffer from using a loop.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;-Eric&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>