Subject: Re: [xsl] xsl:element will not create an output element, in any context|
From: N David Brown <orieldave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:17:20 +0000
I just checked, and my server is serving XSL and XML as application/xml, so that looks fine.
Oh is it a mime type issue what mime type are you serving your stylesheet with? If you serve it with text/plain or text/html or some other non xml type mozilla won't play.
title must not be empty.I know official XHTML should have more in, but as you've said yourself, it should be ok as-is...
and there are more things missing in your stylesheet to make it XHTML, see my comments in my earlier post. But that shouldn't stop browsers from rendering your output, which is close enough to XHTML.
You are not using your xhtml namespace. Furthermore, the namespace is not the correct namespace. See my earlier post. You are creating HTML, ok, but not XHTML.Why is the namespace not correct? It looks ok to me, I just tested the link...
That was David's suggestion, not mine. I just re-emphasized ;)Well, as I've mentioned I'm looking at the transformed content dumped by my PHP; the browser doesn't come into it now, really, other than to refresh my page and re-run my transformation script.
I am wondering what you mean with "value-of's" or what you use to look at you core content. If you use PHP, and you use it from your browser, do you actually use View Source? I tried you example, and it rendered like a tree, the same that displays on David's site.
This is no use. Once you do this, the output fails to be HTML. HTML still does not have an element <test> and will never have.Aargh, I know that! lol. I don't care about producing strict (X)HTML at the minute, I just want to get the output to work, and surely with 'method="xml"' some of this should be fine? Well clearly it should, since it works ok for you and David. I just tried David's link, and it displays fine for me (ul tree); this is so bizarre.
In addition to checking the content-type of your output that David suggests, try running it locally like I did, rename the output xxx.html and serve the html page. If you now still see nothing, it really is some configuration error of your Apache or other server. If you suddenly see the correct output, it is also a configuration error: likely the content-type in the HTTP headers (but that shouldn't stop the View Source from showing the actual content).Ok, I will give that a shot shortly. Thanks for your suggestions again, guys. I'll keep you posted.