[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: rfc 1738

• To: "'Gregory Murphy'" <Gregory.Murphy@e...>,"'Dave Pawson'" <dpawson@n...>
• Subject: RE: rfc 1738
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 09:12:24 +0100
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10305011045260.1099-100000@gris>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> > I doubt it.
> > sun java 1.4, saxon 6.5.2
> >    regards DaveP
> 
> Oh, saxon. Take a look at the "standards conformance" page at 
> http://saxon.sourceforge.net/saxon6.5.2/conformance.html, in 
> particular:
> 
> "SAXON supports the 
> <xsl:document> element defined in the draft XSLT 1.1 
> specification. 

I think Dave is talking about the document() function. Saxon 6.5.2
(which was released over a year ago and still runs with JDK 1.1) uses
the java.net.URL class to handle the URI supplied to the document()
function. You can write your own URIResolver if you don't like the way
it behaves. There seem to be two schools of thought on interpreting URLs
- the "be liberal in what you accept" school, which is happy to accept
"c:\My Documents\temp\test.xml" as a URI, and the "conform to the
standards" school, which has great difficulty in this case because the
standards are such a mess.

Michael Kay

• References:
  • Re: rfc 1738
    • From: Gregory Murphy <Gregory.Murphy@e...>

• Prev by Date: RE: rfc 1738
• Next by Date: Linking Patent, OpenURL
• Previous by thread: Re: rfc 1738
• Next by thread: Re: rfc 1738
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread