Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: From: "Andrew Welch" <AWelch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 10:56:11 -0000 |
> The answer is no in the general case. Consider for instance <test> > <a>a</a> > <b>b</b> > </test> > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> > <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" > version="1.0"> > <xsl:template match="/"> > result from which you cannot get the initial XML document > </xsl:template> > </xsl:stylesheet> > > But you can get some information about the document and its > content if you look inside the stylesheet and to the result. > > If in this case we will have for instance the stylesheet as > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> > <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" > version="1.0"> > <xsl:template match="/"> > [<xsl:value-of select="test/a"/>] > [<xsl:value-of select="test/b"/>] > </xsl:template> > </xsl:stylesheet> > > and the output: > > [a] > [b] > > Then you can infere that the initial document has test as > root element and at least two children a and b with content > "a" and "b" respectivelly. Well if you are going to do that you may as well do: <xsl:template match="/"> <xsl:copy-of select="."/> </xsl:template> But I think the poster was hoping that you could somehow reverse engineer the output of a transform with the stylesheet, and obtain some sort of input xml - which of course, you can't. Cheers andrew XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Re:, Ragulf Pickaxe | Thread | RE: [xsl] Re:, Andrew Welch |
RE: [xsl] Re:, Ragulf Pickaxe | Date | RE: [xsl] Re:, Andrew Welch |
Month |