Subject: RE: [xsl] use cases for d-o-e From: "KIENLE, STEVEN C [IT/0200]" <steven.c.kienle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:38:03 -0500 |
FWIW, I agree. I've always thought that XSLT should be able to produce human readable entities in the output. So far I have been able to live without it. Only I learned the hex equivalent to . But even so, I still feel that XSLT should be able to produce an entity of any sort in the output. Perhaps an <xsl:entity name=".."/> type of element. I mean, you can create processing instructions, elements, attributes and comments; why leave entities out of the mix? Steve -----Original Message----- From: naha@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:naha@xxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:22 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; David Carlisle Subject: Re: [xsl] use cases for d-o-e Quoting David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>: One of the reasons for adopting an XML notation is so that such intermediate documents are human-readable. I'm curious why the XML infoset didn't provide for unexpanded entity references. Aside from being parsed and serialized, the only other operation they'd need to support is name(). XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] use cases for d-o-e, Joerg Pietschmann | Thread | Re: [xsl] use cases for d-o-e, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] use cases for d-o-e, naha | Date | [xsl] Comparing multiple dates to d, Katie McNally |
Month |