Subject: RE: [xsl] feasibility of HTML input From: "Jerry Kimmel" <jkimmel@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:40:43 -0500 |
Dianne, If it is possible to have JUnit and Emma produce XML and you do not want to interfere with your existing outputs, why don't you create both HTML and XML from your existing tools. That way you'll have your reports in both formats. ------------------------------------------ Jerry Kimmel - jkimmel at vasont dot com -----Original Message----- From: didoss@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:didoss@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 1:06 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [xsl] feasibility of HTML input David - I was hoping not to interfere with the existing outputs,...I can go down that path if this one is not worthwhile. Dianne -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: David Wright <dave-xsl@xxxxxxxx> > > I'm a bit puzzled - a quick google suggests that it isn't hard to get both > JUnit and Emma to produce XML reports, as well as HTML. You'd be much > better off parsing that, than the user-friendly HTML. Is there a reason > why you can't? > > Cheers, > David Wright
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] feasibility of HTML input, Robert Koberg | Thread | RE: [xsl] feasibility of HTML input, Wendell Piez |
Re: [xsl] XSL-FO and XSD Informatio, Wendell Piez | Date | RE: [xsl] feasibility of HTML input, Wendell Piez |
Month |