Subject: Re: [xsl] is xslt "canonicalizable" can it be canonicalized? From: "Liam R. E. Quin liam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 05:06:13 -0000 |
On Wed, 2023-02-08 at 01:38 +0000, BR Chrisman brchrisman@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > One example, inside a template: > <foo bar="baz"/> > and > <xsl:element name="foo"> > B <xsl:attribute name="bar">baz</xsl:attribute> > </xsl:element> > > are equivalent (*). > (*) I might be missing something here in the example... possible, but > my > point isn't about whether this example is identically equivalent./. > just > about whether there's been an effort to provide a canonicalization > transform. There are differences indeed, in the handling of namespaces between these two examples. I think with XSLT 3 at least, you can turn literal element constructors into element constructors (the xsl:element form), with careful use of exclude-result-prefixes. But not the other way round - consider <xsl:element name="{$name}"> for example. You can't write <{$name}> to make an element, as that's not well-formed XML syntax. So likely you're stuck handling all of XSLT. But, why are you processing XSLT with XSLT in this way? Sounds interesting, tell us more! :) liam -- Liam Quin,B https://www.delightfulcomputing.com/ Available for XML/Document/Information Architecture/XSLT/ XSL/XQuery/Web/Text Processing/A11Y training, work & consulting. Barefoot Web-slave, antique illustrations: B http://www.fromoldbooks.org
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] is xslt "canonicalizable" can, BR Chrisman brchrism | Thread | Re: [xsl] is xslt "canonicalizable", BR Chrisman brchrism |
[xsl] is xslt "canonicalizable" can, BR Chrisman brchrism | Date | Re: [xsl] is xslt "canonicalizable", BR Chrisman brchrism |
Month |