Re: [xsl] text replacement with mixed content

[Geert Bormans <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for your patience and continuing attention.

I tried to prove in words to you that the test XML already provided 
is a good collection of tests
and the results provided are correct (since you were doubting that)

I made a test set now
for each test in the test set, there is a <in> saying what the task 
is (pattern to be replaced is @original, replacement is @revision)
and an out saying what it should become

I think this is complete now,
I hope this is what you were after

cheers

Geert

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<test-set>
    <test id="1">
        <in original="foo" revision="bar" >
            <p>This old foo is breaking down my foo</p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p>This old <rev>bar</rev> is breaking down my <rev>bar</rev></p>
        </out>
    </test>
    <test id="2">
        <in original="foo" revision="bar" >
            <p>This old <b>foo</b> is breaking down <i>my foo</i></p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p>This old <b><rev>bar</rev></b> is breaking down <i>my 
<rev>bar</rev></i></p>
        </out>
    </test>
    <test id="3">
        <in original="old foo" revision="new bar" >
            <p>This old <b>foo</b> is breaking down <i>my old foo</i></p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p>This <rev>new bar</rev> is breaking down <i>my 
<rev>new bar</rev></i></p>
        </out>
    </test>
    <test id="4">
        <in original="old foo" revision="new bar" >
            <p><b>This old foo</b> is breaking down <i>my old frog</i></p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p><b>This <rev>new bar</rev></b> is breaking down <i>my 
old frog</i></p>
        </out>
    </test>
    <test id="5">
        <in original="old foo" revision="new bar" >
            <p><b>This old    fo-o</b> is breaking down <i>my OLD FOO</i></p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p><b>This <rev>new bar</rev></b> is breaking down <i>my 
<rev>new bar</rev></i></p>
        </out>
    </test>
    <test id="6">
        <in original="this old foo is breaking" revision="a new bar 
is building" >
            <p>This old foo did not realize that <b>this </b>old 
<i><inner/><old-rev rev="1">foo</old-rev></i> is <empty/> breaking 
<i>this old foo</i></p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p>This old foo did not realize that <rev>a new bar is 
building</rev> <i>this old foo</i></p>
        </out>
    </test>
    <test id="7">
        <in original="this old foo is breaking" revision="a new bar 
is building" >
            <p><b type="stronger">I <i>did not realize that this 
</i></b>old foo is breaking <i>this old foo</i></p>
        </in>
        <out>
            <p><b type="stronger">I <i>did not realize that 
</i></b><rev>a new bar is building</rev> <i>this old foo</i></p>
        </out>
    </test>
</test-set>

At 16:24 31/08/2011, you wrote:
> Ok what you've done there is written a load of words... 5 people
> writing test cases from that could have 5 different interpretations.
> For example this just sounds like a riddle:
>
> "markup that starts and ends in A can be dropped
> markup that starts in A and ends outside A (with the exception of
> markup ending right after closing A) must be forced to reopen"
>
> What's needed is an unamibiguous set of input and output combinations
> of just xml, one for each variation of markup, with a short
> description if its not obvious.  That does 2 things - its explains the
> problem to other people in the best way, and provided all the tests
> cover all the areas, you know you are done when all the tests pass.
>
>
>
> On 31 August 2011 14:58, Geert Bormans <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Let me summarize some rules for markup, to show I am not throwing away all
> > markup (but indeed throw away some of it)
> >
> > There is a pattern A that needs to be replaced with a replacement B
> > Pattern  A is described in a string value that triggers replacement but
> > interfering markup can break the pure string in the actual document.
> > A and B can contain multiple words
> > A can contain markup, B is purely text
> > B will be wrapped in an element to indicate it is a replacement(revision)
> > markup that ends in A but did start before A (with the exception of markup
> > that started right before A) will be forced to close prior to A's
> > replacement
> > eg.
> > <p><b>here is some bolded text that my </b> foo</p>
> > will become
> > given that "my foo" needs to become "your bar"
> > <p><b>here is some bolded text that </b><rev>your bar</rev></p>
> >
> > but
> > <p>here is some bolded text that <b>my </b> foo</p>
> > will become
> > <p>here is some bolded text that <rev>your bar</rev></p>
> >
> > this is all about revisions, and the tricky part is to maintain or not
> > maintain earlier revisions
> >
> > markup that starts and ends in A can be dropped
> > markup that starts in A and ends outside A (with the exception of markup
> > ending right after closing A) must be forced to reopen
> > there is a predictable boundary (p in this example) an A should not cross
> > that boundary
> > markup in A does not break words
> > soft hyphens and non breaking spaces (indicated by '-' in the example) can
> > break "words"
> >
> > hope this helps, pretty confident that the example covers most of this and
> > the result is what I need
> >
> >> Ok I've not totally convinced by that expected output, if you are
> >> dropping that level of markup (such as the <j>) then you are heading
> >> towards just stripping all the markup...
> >>
> >> If possible do some actual real world example, with solid expected
> >> results.  When the task is "non-trivial" like this one, you really
> >> don't want mistakes in the expected results.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrew Welch
> >> http://andrewjwelch.com
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Welch
> http://andrewjwelch.com