Subject: RE: [xsl] problem with processing CDATA tags in xml From: "Robby Pelssers" <robby.pelssers@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 14:01:16 +0200 |
Ok.... I need to clarify one thing... Their product schema does not allow a <Value> to have subtags... That's why they use CDATA. And in my opinion that's not so bad since from a data point of view these html tags are pure a rendition thing. But basically I see 2 options from the responses: (1): Use cdata-sections attribute on <xsl:output> (2): make changes to the schema for all elements which may have html tags as children I still see a problem with (1)... in the end when serializing to html I still want to disable-output-escaping so the browser will recognize <sub> and <sup> as tags instead of plain text... but then the greater then '>' will result in invalid xml. And I'm not sure if (2) will be accepted since this will involve quite a bit of work to implement the changes. Kind regards, Robby -----Original Message----- From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 1:44 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [xsl] problem with processing CDATA tags in xml > I have a problem processing following tag: > > The original tag before transformation was: > <Value><![CDATA[G<sub>p(max)</sub> is the maximum power gain, > if K > 1. If K < 1 then G<sub>p(max</sub> = MSG.]]></Value> > > > My customer wants to use <sub> and <sup> tags so in the > rendition it's formatted nicely. > An excellent idea. If you want <sub> and <sup> to be recognized as tags, all they need to do is get rid of the CDATA: <Value>G<sub>p(max)</sub> is the maximum power gain, if K > 1. If K < 1 then G<sub>p(max</sub> = MSG.</Value> The only possible reason for having the CDATA is to prevent the <sub> and <sup> being recognized as tags, so if you want them treated as tags, just cut out the CDATA. Regards, Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] problem with processing C, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] problem with processing C, Martin Honnen |
Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] problem with processing C, Martin Honnen |
Month |