RE: [xsl] Using Transforms and #include file

Subject: RE: [xsl] Using Transforms and #include file
From: "Hellstern, Manny" <manny.hellstern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 10:58:30 -0600

Looks like you and David are in agreement. Thanks for the help.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hunsberger, Peter [mailto:Peter.Hunsberger@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:39 AM
To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: [xsl] Using Transforms and #include file

> 1.  My site has a lot of functionality all in one page because of the
> ".innerHTML" technique I'm using.  I only need specific scripts for
> content so I didn't want to mass load all script.

Fair enough.  However, breaking the individual scripts into individual files
will still work and won't cost you anything.

> 2. When I use the ".innerHTML" method I notice that eventhough you can see
> the representation with the browser, if you try to "viewsource" nothing
> shows up. I'm thinking that If I output my script in the same manner I
> have to bare my "script soul" to the world.

Well I would guess that should be true either way?  However, given the
rather random behavior of IE at such times I have no real idea if that would
be true.

I suspect you could read in the entire JS file as a well formed XML fragment
using document() by wrapping it in a CDATA.  Start with a simple test and go
from there.  That will also tell you whether it is worth going to all the
effort to go all the way...

 XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread