[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: [xsl] Re: xsl/xslt coding standard
Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: xsl/xslt coding standard From: "Conal Tuohy" <conalt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 11:34:51 +1200 |
What about just using custom attributes rather than comment elements? It means your documentation is not arbitrarily structured, but it can at least have a structure that matches the stylesheet itself, without interfering too much with the output tree. <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" xmlns:doc="doc:documentation" xsl:exclude-resultset-prefixes="doc" doc:comment="This stylesheet handles blah elements" > <xsl:template match="blah" doc:comment="Handles each blah"> <xsl:param name="blah-type" doc:comment="the type of blah handled" /> <xsl:for-each select="blah-child[@type="$blah-type]" doc:comment="for each child of the selected type" > etc... An XSLT processor should be happy to ignore these comments (isn't that right?) while a simple XSLT could turn these comments into a nice "pretty-printed" stylesheet. Outside of a template, elements are unproblematic, and as Jeni suggested they should probably use html elements (like in JavaDoc) for occasions where more structure is needed. I don't think there's a need for full-on "DocBook" structure for commenting parameters, variables, templates etc, because mostly these comments could be added as @doc:comment attributes to the XSLT elements themselves. <doc:comment> <p>See also:</p> <ul> <li><a href="blah blah blah">Blah blah blah</a></li> <li><a href="something else">Something else</a></li> </ul> </doc:comment> Con XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Re: xsl/xslt coding stand, Andrew Welch | Thread | Re: [xsl] Re: xsl/xslt coding stand, Jeni Tennison |
Re: [xsl] Inserting softHyphens in , Gustaf Liljegren | Date | Re: [xsl] xsl/xslt coding standard, Steve Ball |
Month |
Keywords