[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: DOCBOOK-APPS: Missing CDATA sections
May I ask why? I'd certainly agree with Elliotte on this point. There is absolutely no difference between <![CDATA[ This is text ]]> and This is text. Also, there's no difference between <![CDATA[<xmltag attname="attvalue">blah</xmltag>]]> and <xmltag attname="attvalue">blah</xmltag>]]> as far as an XML parser is concerned, so it seems unnecessary to attempt to maintain the distinction in either the XML source or in a transformation result. If that difference is important, you'll have to come up with some way of tagging around the CDATA, for example: <phrase role="cdata><![CDATA[ This is text ]]></phrase> and inserting the CDATA tags back in manually. Even this would be tricky and you'd have to play around with the "disable-output-escaping" attribute to get it to work. This might work: <xsl:template match="phrase[@role='cdata']" disable-output-escaping="yes"> <![CDATA[ <xsl:apply-templates/> ]]> </xsl:template> -----Original Message----- From: fyl2xp1 [mailto:vnhu38f93@subdimension.com] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 5:09 PM To: docbook-apps Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: Missing CDATA sections no there was, I needed to include CDATA sections! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu> To: "fyl2xp1" <vnhu38f93@subdimension.com>; "docbook-apps" <docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 8:12 PM Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: Missing CDATA sections > At 7:42 PM +0100 7/11/02, fyl2xp1 wrote: > >That is because I am not referring to the HTML style-sheets, > >that was made quite clear in my original email. It turns out > >that the XSLT spec states: > > > >"CDATA sections should not be used except for text nodes that > >the cdata-section-elements attribute explicitly specifies should > >be output using CDATA sections." > > So is your problem that the text did in fact show up but it was not > enclosed in the CDATA section? If so, you should never have expected > that it would be. CDATA sections are syntax sugar, nothing more. > Processes should not and in general do not depend on whether text is > enclosed in a CDATA section, escaped with character references, or > escaped with entity references. It's all the same thing. If so, then > there really wasn't a need to "go through re-inserting the CDATA > sections." > > -- > > +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ > | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | > +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ > | XML in a Nutshell, 2nd Edition (O'Reilly, 2002) | > | http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/xian2/ | > | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0596002920/cafeaulaitA/ | > +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ > | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | > | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.cafeconleche.org/ | > +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC