Subject: RE: [xsl] Debugging XSLT From: David Tolpin <dvd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2004 00:18:45 +0400 (AMT) |
> From owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Wed Feb 4 16:26:23 2004 > From: "Michael Kay" <mhk@xxxxxxxxx> > To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: RE: [xsl] Debugging XSLT > Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:04:27 -0000 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="us-ascii" > > > There are tools to analyze data in XSLT; they are XPath > > predicates. They are enough to make assertions about a > > program's input and output within the model of the language. > > produce valid XHTML? Since a schema for XHTML already exists, isn't it > rather simpler just to refer to it? Michael, no. It is not. There is no such thing as document type in XSLT except for the validation kludge. I believe that it cannot be added to the language as it has been done. Either a document type is a part of the language, and that would be very unfortunate to have XML Schema used for that, with its errata exceeding in size the specification; or it should not be done within the language. How can I assert that the stylesheet produces a nice-looking XHTML? Since browsers for XHTML already exist, isn't it rather simple to just launch a browser from XSLT 2.0 stylesheet and just see whether the result is nice? Both of us realize that hte latter is nonsense. I hope so. But referring to XML Schema from XSLT is exactly the same nonsense. David Tolpin XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Debugging XSLT, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Debugging XSLT, Robert Koberg |
Re: [xsl] table header respecting x, Manolis Mavrikis | Date | RE: [xsl] Empty Elements in .NET, David Carlisle |
Month |