Re: More entity confusion and my opinion on the right way

Subject: Re: More entity confusion and my opinion on the right way
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 10:25:22 GMT
> I include &#169; in my source document, I get &copy; in the result document.
> 'Hooray!' I think to myself, this must mean that if I include an entity
> reference to an ascii code, it will get translated to the right HTML entity.

> Right.  That's what XT does when you use the HTML namespace as the
> result.


So going back to my `writing entities for mathml' question.

If MathML had a properly registered namespace set up and if
there were a few special control characters that it would be nice to
write out as entity references, such as some of the spacing control
characters that MathML defines, would it be reasonable for an XSL
processor to `know' this and just always write a certain character
as for instance &NegativeThinSpace; rather than &#<some number> if
writing to the MathML namespace.

I'm not asking whether xt (for example) has an easy hook to customise
this today, but whether this (from an XSL/XML viewpoint) would be a
reasonable way to approach the problem. (Rather than extending XSL
to have a way to control the writing of individial entity references).


 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread