Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: _why_ do people use xsl:element and xsl:attribute so much From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 23:30:43 +0100 |
It seems to me that teaching people about literal result elements as "text that is copied through" rather than as "shorthand for instructions to create nodes -- I agree completely, if we describe it as passing text we can't blame people if they want to just output an unmatched start tag. But I think that it _is_ natural to say that a template body can be viewed as a fragment of the output tree, and that the most natural way to express a tree structure in XML is to use the standard XML representation of that tree, thus <a href="...">...</a> for an a element with an href attribute. (where actually one uses xslt/xpath rather than ... to fill out the blanks. On the other hand the comments from a tool author on the utility of the more regular xsl:element constructs sounded reasonable, tool generated sheets, and setting breakpoints etc does seem to have different requirements/flavour than hand authoring. David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] formal XSLT education (wa, Wendell Piez | Thread | Re: [xsl] Re: _why_ do people use x, Wendell Piez |
RE: [xsl] Cant get Value, Chris Bayes | Date | RE: [xsl] Cant get Value, P Vikram |
Month |