This is the mail archive of the xsl-list@mulberrytech.com mailing list .


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: use cases for d-o-e


FWIW, I agree.  I've always thought that XSLT should be able to produce
human readable entities in the output.  So far I have been able to live
without it. Only I learned the hex equivalent to  .  But even so, I
still feel that XSLT should be able to produce an entity of any sort in the
output.  Perhaps an <xsl:entity name=".."/> type of element.  I mean, you
can create processing instructions, elements, attributes and comments; why
leave entities out of the mix?

	Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: naha@ai.mit.edu [mailto:naha@ai.mit.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:22 PM
To: xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com; David Carlisle
Subject: Re: [xsl] use cases for d-o-e


Quoting David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>:


One of the reasons for adopting an XML notation is so that such
intermediate documents are human-readable.

I'm curious why the XML infoset didn't provide for unexpanded entity
references.  Aside from being parsed and serialized, the only other
operation they'd need to support is name().


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]