Is it, then, still XSLT?
Michael Ludwig
+1 (not really XSLT anymore like this)
But as Michael Kay said, that the use case is real is without doubt. On the
other hand, adding provisions to the XSLT standard to make this a lot easier do
not necessarily have to be hard. In principle most parsing is needed to get
information from the XML prolog. It doesn't need to be added to the XDM, as
long as the information can be retrieved somehow.
The second thing that is necessary is to make it possible to give output
directions dynamically, which is going to be hard without buffering the result
tree.
Alternatively, one could might suffice with a simple option to the xsl:output
saying 'preserve-original-prolog' (or something alike), or for more
granularity, things like: 'preserve-encoding', 'preserve-doctype-declaration',
etc..
Adding full control on the local entity declaration subset is likely to violate
the XML standard however. I recall that XML processors *must* resolve entities.
The reason was to keep XML processing simple. (correct me if I am wrong)
Adding entity handling would sound like going back to the SGML era to me.. ;-)
Kind regards,
Geert
Drs. G.P.H. Josten
Consultant
http://www.daidalos.nl/
Daidalos BV
Source of Innovation
Hoekeindsehof 1-4
2665 JZ Bleiswijk
Tel.: +31 (0) 10 850 1200
Fax: +31 (0) 10 850 1199
http://www.daidalos.nl/
KvK 27164984
De informatie - verzonden in of met dit emailbericht - is afkomstig van
Daidalos BV en is uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde. Indien u dit
bericht onbedoeld hebt ontvangen, verzoeken wij u het te verwijderen. Aan dit
bericht kunnen geen rechten worden ontleend.
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--