Re: [xsl] XSL template "namespace" problem

[Ian Bonnycastle <ibonny@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Jon Gorman wrote:

> Michael's point is that the javascript URL/URIs are not handled by all
> HTML browsers and validators.  (In other words, he's talking about the
> HTML page that is generated after running the transformation process).
> For example, my pocket pc browser used to have issues with one of the
> online applications that did this all the time. There are better
> techniques to do this, see websites like http://www.quirksmode.org.
> (I also know some vague techniques for having an empty href string or
> using css styles to mimic the look of a link.  Been a while since I've
> done any of those)  Getting into too much detail about something
> that's really HTML and JavaScript design is off topic for this list.

   Ok. I guess I was just getting confused about what exactly wasn't "well 
formed". I gave an example on one of my earlier posts about xsltproc 
taking the input I gave above and actually processing it. Sure the output 
isn't well formed, but its HTML, so, like you said, it doesn't matter. 
Whether the browser in question interprets it, as you also said above, 
depends on the browser and can't be relied upon with the way I'm passing 
it. In fact, it doesn't work with Firefox, as an example.

   But you're right. Interpretation of HTML and Javascript by a browser, 
either in general, or in specific, is way off topic for this list.

   I appreciate you laying out the details for me, and I will read up on 
these links referred to me to get better details of "well formediness" (if 
thats even a word) of the documents in question. Unfourtunately, most 
documents I read don't give details on some of the finer points of 
documents being "well formed" beyond standard XML structure with tags, 
attributes and values. I'll keep looking though.

   Thanks again,

   Ian