Re: [xsl] xml:base, resolve-uri and imported xslt files: how to get the importing base url from imported xslt

[Abel Braaksma <abel.online@xxxxxxxxx>]

Michael Kay wrote:
> You either
> need to do the call on document() in the importing module; or you need to
> make the base URI of the importing module accessible to the imported module
> for example by declaring a global variable
>
> <xsl:variable name="importing-base-uri" select="base-uri()"/>
>
> in the importing module.

Thanks Michael.
This tip, combined with all the details provided by David and others, I 
thought of the following solution as a perfect best of breed, but 
couldn't get it to work:
- in the imported stylesheet, add a parameter 'importing-base-uri', 
required = yes.
- in the importing stylesheet, add the same parameter, but now with a 
value, overriding the required-attribute in the imported stylesheet.

The purpose was, using this construct, to raise an error when a 
user-defined stylesheet (it is part of a bigger concept) does not add 
the 'importing-base-uri' in his stylesheet, without requiring the 
processor to add the parameter as well. Alas, this does not work. I 
found out that (http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#global-variables):

"If a stylesheet contains more than one binding for a global variable of 
a particular name, then the binding with the highest import precedence 
is used."

This seems to only apply to the binding, not to the other attributes of 
a parameter. But this import precedence does apply, when going from 
required=no to required=yes (???). Yes, really, like this:

IMPORTED: <xsl:param name="resource-location-url" select="'../'" />

IMPORTING: <xsl:param name="resource-location-url" required="yes" />

This works, making the resulting parameter, after import precedence, 
required. But I want it the other way around (making a required param 
non-required), which does not work, and leaves the resulting parameter 
as required (instead of being overridden by the importing param, like 
above).

Is this strange, or is it just me, or do I need new glasses? :D

I guess I have to resort to using the non-required variant.

-- Abel Braaksma
  http://www.nuntia.com