Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: U+ conversion to Unicode characters From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 16:42:28 GMT |
> followed by an ogonek. The behavior seems perfectly logical, but I was > expecting (hoping for) something different -- lowercase a with an ogonek > attached ( or & # x00105;). It's not really an xsl question in that xsl can only generate the text streamn with the two unicode characters. Whether or not the renderer recognises that that is a combining character sequence and renders it accordingly is a feature of the browser rather than xsl. Of course for those cases where there are precomposed characters already in unicode you could get the xsl to output the precomposed character, although xslt's string handling wouldn't really make it the language of choice for that operation, and it might be better to pass the output (or input) of the transform through a dedicated unicode normaliser. On the other hand if there are only two or three such cases in your example docs, you could use the string-replace template from the FAQ and replace these pairs. -- http://www.dcarlisle.demon.co.uk/matthew ________________________________________________________________________ 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 -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] Re: U+ conversion to Unicode , M V | Thread | RE: [xsl] Re: U+ conversion to Unic, Michael Kay |
[xsl] Interpretaion of grouping for, james walker | Date | RE: [xsl] getting crlf's, but putti, Michael Kay |
Month |