RE: [xsl] does xsl:output method xml guarentee well formedness?

Subject: RE: [xsl] does xsl:output method xml guarentee well formedness?
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:45:27 +0100
In the presence of character maps or disable-output-escaping, there is no
guarantee that the serialized result of a transformation will be
well-formed.

This is stated at the end of the introduction to section 5 of the
serialization spec, 

http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt-xquery-serialization/#xml-output

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Fuller [mailto:jim.fuller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 11 April 2005 09:38
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [xsl] does xsl:output method xml guarentee well formedness?
> 
> for example...in XSLT 2.0 (SAXON 8.4)
> 
> ex. XML
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <example>
>     <test>a</test>
> </example>
> 
> ex. XSLT
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
> version="2.0">
>     <xsl:output method="xml" indent="yes" use-character-maps="test"/>
>     <xsl:template match="example">
>         <xsl:value-of select="test"/>
>     </xsl:template>
>     <xsl:character-map name="test">
>         <xsl:output-character character="a" string="&lt;test&gt;"/>
>     </xsl:character-map>
> </xsl:stylesheet>
> 
> results in
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><test>
> 
> using the following stylesheet as an analogy;
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
> version="2.0">
>     <xsl:output method="xml" indent="yes" />
>     <xsl:template match="example">
>         &lt;test&gt;
>     </xsl:template>
> </xsl:stylesheet>
> 
> results in
> 
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> 
>         &lt;test&gt;
> 
> which is of course well formed.
> 
> cant really tell from the spec if xsl:output method guarentee's well
> formedness or perhaps xsl:character-map needs something more ?
> 
> --Jim Fuller

Current Thread