Re: [xsl] pretty-printing XML into HTML

Subject: Re: [xsl] pretty-printing XML into HTML
From: "Lars Huttar" <lars_huttar@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:45:46 -0600
Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
> "Lars Huttar" wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the pointer. I thought this seemed like
> something that would
> > have been done years ago!
> >

> >
> > By the way, a few (actual or possible) textual errata I ran across
> > in the process of looking up XPath Visualizer:
> >
> > There's a broken link on the XPath Visualizer page
> > at
> >
> > should be
> >
> Quite possible -- this page has not been touched for three
> years and the
> links in the XSL FAQ have changed several times since then.
> I will probably create a new page for the XPV on
> (if and
> when I have free time for this), which will compensate
> temporarily for the
> time lag. But please, do not expect this anytime soon as the
> XPV is history
> and not high priority for me at the moment.

No problem. Not high priority for me either.

> >
> > Also, the Readme.txt file for the Mozilla version of XPath
> Visualizer
> > 1.4 (which I found at
> > says:
> >
> >   This is a customisation of the original XMLPrettyPrint.xsl
> >   written by Jonas Sicking <sicking@xxxxxxxxxxx>.
> >
> > I can't find references to any XSL file by that name, but there
> > is a file called XMLPrettyPrint.xml (note extension)
> > by Jonas Sicking, at
> >
> >
> > Maybe the Readme.txt file needs to be corrected?
> I have in E:\Program Files\\Mozilla\bin\res\xml the following two
> files:
> XMLPrettyPrint.css
> XMLPrettyPrint.xsl
> Needless to say, I have not renamed any original files. Even if somebody
> renamed the file in a subsequent release of Mozilla, it is only correct to
> leave unchanged in the readme.txt the name of the original file that served
> as a base for the XPV for Mozilla.

OK. I don't know whether the file was renamed, or the file I found was
a completely different one.

> > Lastly, the file XPathMainNS.htm (in the Mozilla version)
> > has a title of "XPath Visualiser Ver. 1.0" (note both spelling and
> > version number) -- whereas the Readme.txt file says the latest
> > version is 1.4. Presumably XPathMainNS.htm needs to have its title
> > changed?
> So, what is wrong with the spelling? That it is not american? :o)

I guess I deserved that... :-) even though it was in Australia that
I learned to spell.

My point was consistency, but I see now that most of the
occurrences in that Readme.txt spell it with a second "s".
In that case, the minority spelling variants are in the Readme.txt file at

  "The expandable/collapsible syntax colour-coded display of the source
XML Document is the same as the one of the XPath Visualizer for Internet Explorer."


  "1. The CSS styles were modified, so that the fonts and colours used are the same as those of
XPath Visualizer's IE version."

I guess the reason I thought "izer" was your choice of normative spelling
was from your email of yesterday...

} This has been done years ago. For example look at the code of the
} stylesheets used by the XPath Visualizer (both for IE and Mozilla).

... and from the XPath Visualizer web page (
that seemed pretty official, and where it's spelled "izer" everywhere.

> The text about the latest version is referring to the XPV for IE -- and it
is true that 1.4 is the latest version for the XPV for IE.
> The readme.txt file does explicitly say:
> "Files in this distribution (XPathVisualiser for Mozilla -- Ver. 1.0)".

Oops, my bad. I didn't look far enough.

> To summarize:
>  Thank you for finding the bug(s) related to displaying of namespace
> definitions by the XPV for Mozilla. The fix will be part of the next
> release.
> Dimitre Novatchev.
> FXSL developer.

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread