Subject: Re: [xsl] Is it OK for xsl:output to affect the construction of an unserialized result tree?|
From: Barry Lay <blay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 13:14:48 -0400
BTW, given that the setOutputProperty(OutputKeys.METHOD, "xml") on the Transformer can be used to override the value of the method attribute in the xsl:output element, I think we're already pretty much where we need to be. It *is* still a serialization, and things like the indentation directive still come into play... but if you really want to see all the elements that the stylesheet normally suppresses in text mode, you can get 'em.
All of this is personal opinion, not that of IBM or Apache or the government of Outer Vardabedia. My apologies if I've missed anything critical. But I really think we need to be able to unplug a serialize-and-reparse connection and plug in direct pipelining, or split a pipeline into serialize-and-parse, and expect to get something reasonably close to The Same Result out the far end... and I think that's what the customers will expect the default to be.
______________________________________ Joe Kesselman, IBM Next-Generation Web Technologies: XML, XSL and more. "The world changed profoundly and unpredictably the day Tim Berners Lee got bitten by a radioactive spider." -- Rafe Culpin, in r.m.filk
|<- Previous||Index||Next ->|
|Re: [xsl] Is it OK for xsl:output t, Joseph Kesselman||Thread||RE: [xsl] Can´t escape, Andrew Welch|
|Re: [xsl] node's full content + som, Földényi Tamás||Date||Re: [xsl] modifying elements value, Mukul Gandhi|