Subject: Re: [xsl] \ From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 14:27:12 GMT |
> '\' by itself is not prohibited in URLs, is it? no, but it doesn't mean what people think it means (it has the same status as "a") > Is "http://example.com/\data\file.xsl" an invalid URL? No, but it has a _single_ path component called "\data\file.xsl" so if that file has an <xsl:include href="foo.xsl"/> then foo.xsl is a relative uri that corresponds to "http://example.com/foo.xsl" which probably is not what was intended. If the same file is served from "http://example.com/data/file.xsl" then the relative foo.xsl uri will resolve to "http://example.com/data/foo.xsl" Note that even if the server tries to be kind and silently map \ to / (as it may do as it is free to map uris to its file system in any way it likes) then it will still fail as a _client_ given that relative URI is mandated to ask for http://example.com/data/foo.xsl as it is the client that resolves the relative uris and requests an absolute uri from the server. > Putting it another way, I think it is legal to write > > <xsl:import href="module1\stylesheet1.xsl"/> its legal but the base uri of the included file might not be what you expect. David -- 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] \, David Tolpin | Thread | Re: [xsl] \, David Tolpin |
RE: [xsl] counter in XSL - some mor, G. Ken Holman | Date | [xsl] Begginer question: Xalan XObj, alice |
Month |