Q: literal comments in style sheet

Discussion in 'XML' started by David Carlisle, Apr 5, 2005.

  1. (Malcolm Dew-Jones) writes:

    > I am examining xslt 1.0 (as documented at http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt).
    >
    > I have seen notes elsewhere to a 1.1, but I don't see such a beast at the
    > above site. Is there an XSLT 1.1, (perhaps it is XPath 1.1 I have seen)
    > or am I just confused?


    There was a draft (still available from w3c site) but the working group
    killed off work on xslt 1.1 to work on 2.0 (before they knew 2.0 was
    going to take half a decade to align with xquery:) A couple of xslt
    systems (notably saxon 6.x do implement the 1.1 draft actually) but as
    it will never be finalised now it's best to pretend that they don't.

    >
    > I am curious about some literal things in the style sheets.
    >
    > Is there an option that controls the passing of _literal_ comments and
    > PI's to the output?


    No.

    >
    > I know I could use xsl:comment to output a comment, but I am not trying to
    > output anything, I am just trying to make sure I understand the specs.
    >
    > As far as I can see, literal comments and processing instructions in the
    > style sheet are never output.
    >

    True.

    David
     
    David Carlisle, Apr 5, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. I am examining xslt 1.0 (as documented at http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt).

    I have seen notes elsewhere to a 1.1, but I don't see such a beast at the
    above site. Is there an XSLT 1.1, (perhaps it is XPath 1.1 I have seen)
    or am I just confused?

    I am curious about some literal things in the style sheets.

    Is there an option that controls the passing of _literal_ comments and
    PI's to the output?

    I know I could use xsl:comment to output a comment, but I am not trying to
    output anything, I am just trying to make sure I understand the specs.

    As far as I can see, literal comments and processing instructions in the
    style sheet are never output.


    --

    This space not for rent.
     
    Malcolm Dew-Jones, Apr 5, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. David Carlisle () wrote:
    : (Malcolm Dew-Jones) writes:

    : > I am examining xslt 1.0 (as documented at http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt).
    : >
    : > I have seen notes elsewhere to a 1.1, but I don't see such a beast at the
    : > above site. Is there an XSLT 1.1, (perhaps it is XPath 1.1 I have seen)
    : > or am I just confused?

    : There was a draft (still available from w3c site) but the working group
    : killed off work on xslt 1.1 to work on 2.0 (before they knew 2.0 was
    : going to take half a decade to align with xquery:) A couple of xslt
    : systems (notably saxon 6.x do implement the 1.1 draft actually) but as
    : it will never be finalised now it's best to pretend that they don't.

    : >
    : > I am curious about some literal things in the style sheets.
    : >
    : > Is there an option that controls the passing of _literal_ comments and
    : > PI's to the output?

    : No.

    : >
    : > I know I could use xsl:comment to output a comment, but I am not trying to
    : > output anything, I am just trying to make sure I understand the specs.
    : >
    : > As far as I can see, literal comments and processing instructions in the
    : > style sheet are never output.
    : >
    : True.

    : David

    thanks

    --

    This space not for rent.
     
    Malcolm Dew-Jones, Apr 5, 2005
    #3
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Marc Nederhoff

    Adding style sheet dynamicaly

    Marc Nederhoff, Nov 5, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    548
    charles
    Nov 5, 2003
  2. Jim Heavey

    Cascading Style Sheet

    Jim Heavey, Nov 18, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    502
    Justin Musick
    Nov 19, 2003
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,330
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    705
  5. Monk
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,791
    Michael Wojcik
    Apr 20, 2005
  6. Ken Varn
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    744
    Ken Varn
    Apr 26, 2004
  7. Anonieko Ramos

    What's wrong with rpc-literal? Why use doc-literal?

    Anonieko Ramos, Sep 27, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net Web Services
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    619
    Anonieko Ramos
    Sep 27, 2004
  8. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    822
    Dr John Stockton
    Jun 3, 2006
Loading...