Re: [xsl] Does anyone know how to make IE less useless for XSLT developement?

Subject: Re: [xsl] Does anyone know how to make IE less useless for XSLT developement?
From: "M. David Peterson" <xmlhacker@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:58:14 -0700
An addition to this list that I forgot to add:

Google has created an open source XPath/XSLT project built entirely in
Javascript.  While it lacks quite a few features, it does bring enough
support of the XPath and XSLT 1.0 specs to be, at very least, a useful
addition to our toolbag.

I've created another addition to the Browsers namespace:

http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Other_XSLT_Solutions

I will add the info pertaining to Google AJAXSLT (I know, don't get me
started on the choice for the projects name) now.

For those interested in learning more and don't want to wait for my
additions to the above linked wiki entry, you can access the project
from this > http://code.google.com/projects.html < page on
code.google.com.

Actually, in visiting this page I noticed the following which might be
of interest to Emacs users on this list:

Google TAGS
This is an extension to GNU Emacs and X-Emacs TAGS functionality, with
a server-side component that narrows down the view of a potentially
large TAGS file and serves the narrowed view over the wire for better
performance.
An Emacs Lisp client, a python client, and vim extensions are supplied.

On 2/10/06, M. David Peterson <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hey Bryan,
>
> I must admit, I don't blame you.  There are *A TON* of frustrating
> pieces to TransforMiiX, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by the Moz
> development community.  I have heard "chatter" that there may be some
> effort put forth by a few well respected developers is the general XML
> dev world, and if that happens, then I plan to get involved as well.
> But until that happens we're left dealing with things the way they
> are.
>
> I realize this doesn't help now, but as far as general pointers, I
> would have to think on it a bit.
>
> Actually, this [dealing with TransforMiiX] would be a *REALLY* good
> topic to begin on XSLTWiki.  So I just created it and posted a hack
> that I will *sparingly* use to circumvent the fact that TransforMiiX
> does not implement the *optional* disable-output-escaping attribute.
>
> http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Mozilla
>
> A quick note: It seems like this would be a good thing to create for
> *ALL* browsers that implement support for XSLT.  There are five now...
> or in other words, *ALL* of the major browser vendors: IE,
> Mozilla-based, Safari/Konqueror, and Opera 9.0.  Actually, I better
> verify Konqueror.  I don't know for sure if they have integrated
> Apple's additions to the codebase.  Anybody know?
>
> I've created the initial pages and will add content to them as time
> allows.  Anybody who has some knowledge for any of these browsers that
> pertains to each ones implementation of support of XSLT, your time
> will be *MUCH* appreciated and praised by *ALL* who benefit from your
> efforts.
>
> You can access them here:
> http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Mozilla
> http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Opera
> http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Internet_Explorer
> http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Safari
> http://www.xsltwiki.com/index.php/Browsers:Konqueror
>
> I will continue to think about it and add content to each of these
> sections that I have some information thats seems might be helpful.
> If anybody else has any pointers, by all means, please add them to any
> of these sections! :D
>
> Thanks in advance for anything any of you might be willing to add.
>
> Enjoy your day!
>
> On 2/10/06, bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hmm, I pretty much gave up achieving anything serious with
> > Transformiix a while back, yet you seem to feel it is doable if a pain
> > - any hints, pointers, links to get around various Transformiix
> > problems?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Bryan Rasmussen
> >
> >
> > On 2/10/06, M. David Peterson <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Thanks for the vote of confidence Dimitre! :D
> > >
> > > Terence, In answer to your suggested problems with IE... I assure you,
> > > its not a problem with IE/MSXML.  Fx uses the TransforMiiX XSLT
> > > engine, and... well, let put it this way:
> > >
> > > The following Boolean test evaluates to true:
> > >
> > > (TransforMiiX != MSXML and MSXML > TransforMiiX)
> > >
> > > You may have to set aside the fact that, technically speaking, the
> > > above comparison doesn't even really make all that much sense given
> > > that, in XPath/XSLT anyway, the usage of the suggested sibling
> > > elements of MSXML and TransforMiiX would suggest that each elements
> > > value was a number.  So what number would that number represent?
> > > Actually, I can think of a few, but that beside the point... I think
> > > you probably get the point I am trying to make... I hope anyway :D
> > >
> > > If you take a look at this >
> > > http://www.xsltblog.com/archives/2005/12/finally_someone_1.html <
> > > entry on my personal blog, you will notice this statement:
> > >
> > > > Also, to keep the various processing tasks separate(e.g. configuration separate from output), normally I would create a separate stylesheet for the actual processing of the HTML output ( e.g. page:output) and import this stylesheet using the xsl:import instruction element. But Transformiix has, um, how should I say... issues with imported stylesheets and namespaces which are not part of the base XML document being processed. Don't know, don't care, so don't ask. (read: I gave up trying to make sense of why Transformiix does half the things it does (or doesn't do, as the case may be) and instead try not to push it in places that, while nice (like keeping processing tasks such as configuration and output processing seperate), are not mandatory in regards to functionality.)
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been working with TransforMiiX for a while now.  In fact, I'm
> > > both a Fx user AND developer made a bit more evident if you visit this
> > > link > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/159059536X/qid=1139565323/sr=1-6/ref=sr_1_6/104-9000304-7549531?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
> > > <
> > >
> > > I can speak with a bit of authority on this when I state "I promise,
> > > the percieved problem with MSXML and the suggestion that XSLT in Fx is
> > > better" are both incorrect.
> > >
> > > Moving forward.   I will accept the notion that debugging XSLT in Fx
> > > can be a bit nicer.  However, the fact that you are finding success in
> > > Fx and not in IE using the same transformation file means that you
> > > have stumbled upon one of the problems with TransforMiiX, not a bug in
> > > MSXML.
> > >
> > > I do understand your frustration, however, and if you can supply me
> > > with some code I would be happy to help solve your problem.
> > >
> > > Cheers :)
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/10/06, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > Honestly, I don't know how
> > > > > people put up with developing apps exclusively under IE. It's like
> > > > > having both arms and legs chopped off once you've developed with FF
> > > >
> > > > There are good examples of web sites that generate their pages using
> > > > client-side XSLT transformation inside IE. Just the first two that
> > > > prominently come into my mind:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.xsltblog.com/
> > > >
> > > > http://jenitennison.com/index.xml
> > > >
> > > > By asking these people (and isn't this exactly the purpose of any
> > > > forum?) how they did it one will definitely get the best information
> > > > from the experts.
> > > >
> > > > So, the general answer is (and that's really good!) that one still has
> > > > to learn a lot.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Dimitre Novatchev
> > > > ---------------------------------------
> > > > The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of
> > > > thinking with which we created them.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 2/10/06, Terence Kearns <terence.kearns@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > Unfortunately there are still some traditionalists out there who
> > > > > insist on using IE. So far, my web application is only working in
> > > > > Firefox. I load it up in IE, and I just get a lame error with no line
> > > > > number and "the source is unavailable". Honestly, I don't know how
> > > > > people put up with developing apps exclusively under IE. It's like
> > > > > having both arms and legs chopped off once you've developed with FF.
> > > > > IE says "This name may not contain the '@' character: -->@<--name
> > > > > Error occurred during compilation of included or imported sty..."
> > > > > My server-side transform processor doesn't compain about any errors
> > > > > either so I'm assuming it's not just FF being lenient. I don't want to
> > > > > transform server-side unless I absolutely have to.
> > > > >
> > > > > Surely there must be some sort of extension that you can get for IE
> > > > > that allows you to debug with it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > <M:D/>
> > >
> > > M. David Peterson
> > > http://www.xsltblog.com/
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> <M:D/>
>
> M. David Peterson
> http://www.xsltblog.com/
>


--
<M:D/>

M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com/

Current Thread