Subject: Re: [xsl] xsl:include still a problem.. From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 13:10:53 GMT |
> Thanks David: Looks a really useful addition to 1.1 I think arguably it already affects XSL 1.0 XSLT relies on an XML parser to construct an input tree for it. (due to differences discussed recently on this list, it may not really do this and it may build the tree itself, but that is an ignorable detail) The arser _has_ to be XML namespace aware, it also has to report the base URI of every node (or at least most, as laid out in the xpath spec). If you use an XML parser that is XML base aware I would imagine that XSLT just gets passed a tree in which the base URI of some nodes have been affected, but it doesn't need to "know" that. David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] xsl:include still a probl, DPawson | Thread | [xsl] regarding xsl:script, Rosa I-Ting Cheng |
RE: [xsl] xsl:include still a probl, DPawson | Date | Re: [xsl] RE: syntax sugar for call, Francis Norton |
Month |