Subject: Fw: Splitting XSL From: "Oren Ben-Kiki" <oren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:04:53 +0200 |
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >You can't really use DTD for a general XSL can you? >You'd need a different DTD for each result namespace as the elements of >the result tree appear within the templates. I also thought so. But it turns out there's a solution. Assume for a moment that the XST stylesheet writer has limited himself to using <xsl:element> and <xsl:attribute>, never writing <FOO BAR="BLOOP"> directly. I claim that it is possible to write a DTD which covers all such stylesheets. Agreed? Now, how hard is it to convert an XSL stylesheet which doesn't obey this restriction into one which does? Not hard at all, it turns out. It would be a simple SAX filter, for example. Or you could write an XSL stylesheet which does that :-) So, combining the two, you could easily write an XSL verifier which would verify _any_ XSL stylesheet under two DTDs. >But yes being able to verify that valid input will aways produce valid >output would be nice (but likely to get harder to do as more features >are added to the language) This point was made several times in discussion of particular features, such as scripting. Of course, partial verification is better then none. Also, adding some directives to the verifier - "believe me that the script function 'foo' always returns a valid 'bar' element" - would help. Share & Enjoy, Oren Ben-Kiki XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Fw: Splitting XSL, Oren Ben-Kiki | Thread | Re: Splitting XSL, Guy_Murphy |
Re: SGML output from XSL?, Chris Lilley | Date | info required, Jayadeva Babu Gali |
Month |