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

Re: XLink transformations

• From: Martin Bryan <mtbryan@s...>
• To: Ben Trafford <ben@l...>, xml-dev@x...
• Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 08:26:40 +0100

Ben

>          There are interesting issues around recursion of links (what 
> happens if I call a document that calls a document that calls a document, 
> and so forth) and what stylesheet properties to include (what happens when 
> I call a document with its own stylesheet, does mine override it? What 
> happens when the two documents share the same element names?). I've 
> resolved the former issue with a simple error catching if too much 
> recursion happens (and recursion levels can be set as a variable in the 
> tool), and the latter using a fairly complicated scheme where onLoad 
> documents are brought in with their stylesheet declaration and some nifty 
> namespace magic.

Its interesting that you've raised this issue with the XLink group as I've just raised a similar issue with the XInclude group (what happens if the included object has an attached stylesheet - what is its scope?). They pointed out to me that xsl-stylesheet PIs are only valid if the occur in the prolog, so any included stylesheet calls are invalid. Presumably the same applies to documents that are linked to another document as the PI therefore does not get placed in the combined tree at a valid point. The question I raised was whether it shouldn't be a requirement that PIs that are known to be invalid in context be stripped from the inclusion tree.

Martin Bryan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XLink transformations
    • From: Ben Trafford <ben@l...>

• References:
  • Re: XLink transformations
    • From: Ben Trafford <ben@l...>

• Prev by Date: Referencing two xml files
• Next by Date: RE: Referencing two xml files
• Previous by thread: Re: XLink transformations
• Next by thread: Re: XLink transformations
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread