Hi Abel,
The best thing I believe is to have specific unit test support in the
XSLT IDE.
If you analyze more closely the requirement it is not as simple as
having a list of input files - you will want also to control the XSLT
processor you use, what happens with the output, etc.
As a solution until unit test specific support will be ready in oXygen
you can use the batch XSLT processing at project level. You can organize
the set of files you want to run against a stylesheet in a folder
(either real or logical) and then create a scenario for the desired
transformation. Then you can use the "Apply transformation scenario" or
the "Transform with..." actions from the contextual menu on that project
folder to invoke the batch transformation of all the files in the folder.
Best Regards,
George
---------------------------------------------------------------------
George Cristian Bina - http://aboutxml.blogspot.com/
<oXygen/> XML Editor, Schema Editor and XSLT Editor/Debugger
http://www.oxygenxml.com
Abel Braaksma (online) wrote:
Hi George,
Thanks again for your quick response.
In a perfect world, there are no lock-ins. If Oxygen were to create
a specific PI (like Firefox recently added parameters to the
xml-stylesheet PI) is would become a lock-in and people don't like
that. Of course, a PI is harmless if nothing is done with it, but
still.
Things will get worse if other companies start to use their own PI.
And even more worse if, when you run a transform, the PI is
automatically added (Altova). I dislike that very much and that is
one (of many) reasons why I didn't stick to that product.
However, a PI is nothing more than a name and a string. How
difficult would it be to make it a setting, say, something like:
PI name for test xml: 'test-xml-input-file'
PI test xml tokenize regex: \s+
then the PI would look like this:
<?test-xml-input-file sometestfile.xml ?>
This would give the end user all ways to use its own custom methods.
Note that when you would want to impose a "standard", you cannot
start the PI with 'xml' without the consent of W3C (they are
reserved).
Cheers,
-- Abel Braaksma
Hi Abel,
I see what you mean. I read the message too quickly and I thought
you
were referring to the xml-stylesheet PI.
I do not see any difficulties to implement this similar with the way
we
implemented the xml-styelsheet PI support. However, it will be great
if
instead of an oXygen specific PI we would be able to use something
more
generic.
I am curious how much interest is in having such a PI. I remember
that I
was pro having a PI to associate a Relax NG schema with an XML
document
and there was a strong reaction against making a proposal for such a
PI
on the Relax NG list. So what people think about such a PI?
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--