Subject: Re: [xsl] more elegant way to process element with default value? From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:35:53 +0100 |
> The parsing does look for "element start tags, etc" in a sense (at least, it > looks for the "<" delimiter, the beginning of a start tag) - it just > signals an error if they are found because they are illegal there. Of course the terminology is confusing as CDATA is PCDATA without a P to indicate that it's not parsed (or at least not parsed as normal) in SGML you could have a < in CDATA attributes (just as you could in CDATA elements) but in XML CDATA elements don't exist and allowing < or not in an attribute value depending on its DTD declaration would have gone against the whole point of XML that an instance ought to be able to be parsed as a tree without using a DTD at all, so < is uniformly banned in all attribute values. CDATA was especially confusing in SGML as for elements it made both < and & into normal characters (ie like a CDATA marked section) but for attributes it made < normal but & is still special so you can go & # 1234; in CDATA attributes and the & has its special meaning. David ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] coping with huge xml-saxo, Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] Parsing error on AIX Unicode , Tengshe, Ashish |
RE: [xsl] xsl or html?, Passin, Tom | Date | RE: [xsl] column size of html table, cknell |
Month |