[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Hi David,
At 10:49 PM 4/20/01, you wrote:
Ah -- so the namespace _declaration_ is there in the DTD regardless of whether you allow for prefixes?
Still, the existance of other declarations Zeljko cited --
suggests that a similar kind of surgery, albeit deeper, might suffice to get the DTD to suppress its hard-wired namespace declarations. Admittedly, it might be going a bit further than the designers intended. But the basic requirement of being able to use the same XSLT on documents with or without the DOCTYPE declaration, without a big song and dance in the stylesheet, seems quite reasonable to me.
Namespaces are nicely enabling for some things; for others they just seem to get in the way. Makes my head hurt.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Re: [xsl] XML source with DOCTYPE declaration
Subject: Re: [xsl] XML source with DOCTYPE declaration From: Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 18:46:12 +0100 |
Hi David,
At 10:49 PM 4/20/01, you wrote:
> This suggests there's a top-level switch intended to turn namespace > prefixes on the names on and off.
the declarations allow you to set the prefix used (or not) in the instance, the default for HTML (and MathML which uses the same) is for no prefix, but you can specify a prefix if you wish by using a parameter entity declaration.
but non of this makes any difference to the stylesheet unless you use th ename() function (which is usually inadvisable for any input files using namespaces)
Ah -- so the namespace _declaration_ is there in the DTD regardless of whether you allow for prefixes?
Still, the existance of other declarations Zeljko cited --
<!ENTITY % NS.prefixed "IGNORE"> <!ENTITY % XHTML.prefixed "%NS.prefixed;"> <!ENTITY % XHTML.xmlns "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <!ENTITY % XHTML.prefix ""> <!ENTITY % XHTML.xmlns.attrib "xmlns %URI.datatype; #FIXED '%XHTML.xmlns; %XLINK.xmlns.attrib;">
suggests that a similar kind of surgery, albeit deeper, might suffice to get the DTD to suppress its hard-wired namespace declarations. Admittedly, it might be going a bit further than the designers intended. But the basic requirement of being able to use the same XSLT on documents with or without the DOCTYPE declaration, without a big song and dance in the stylesheet, seems quite reasonable to me.
Namespaces are nicely enabling for some things; for others they just seem to get in the way. Makes my head hurt.
Regards, Wendell
====================================================================== Wendell Piez mailto:wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com 17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635 Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631 Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML ======================================================================
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XML source with DOCTYPE d, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] XML source with DOCTYPE d, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] XSLT FAQ? and really ques, RSuiter | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT FAQ? and really ques, David Carlisle |
Month |