Re: More entity confusion and my opinion on the right way

[Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx]

Hi.

It's certainly what I had assumed. If it isn't so, I think it certianly
should be.

Sometime soon I'm going to have to sit down and get my head around what the
hell is happening with the resolution of < and & in the IE5b2 parser, as
it's giving me all sorts of nightmares. I'm shamed to say, that my progress
to date is largely through trial and error. I certainly can't intuit what
is going on.

Cheers
     Guy.





xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 01/07/99 07:28:21 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  Re: More entity confusion and my opinion on the right way




Paul,
[SNIP]
since the & can appear in the literal form, shouldn't it remain in the
literal form when it is written back out from the result tree? I can
understand replacing the standard entities, but an entity not declared
should be left alone if it appears in a CDATA section, right?
[SNIP]





 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list