Re: Can I access elements in the output tree?

on 11/3/00 7:41 PM, Kay Michael at Michael.Kay@xxxxxxx wrote:

>> The xml-processing instruction (<?xml version='1.0'?> ...
> 
> <?xml version='1.0'?> is an XML declaration, or a text declaration, it is
> not a processing instruction, despite the fact that it uses similar syntax.
> 
>> I tried to insert a <xsl:processing-instruction name='xml'/>
>> into the final
>> output tree just before copying the node-set. This however is
>> not allowed.
> 
> Correct: because processing instructions named "xml" are not allowed, to
> prevent confusion with XML declarations and text declarations.
> 
> Mike Kay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

Looking at http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#section-XML-Output-Method (section
16.1) some more, it looks like the behavior is within the bounds of the
recommendation. The XML output method renders a wellformed XML external
general parsed entity:

According to http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-xml-20001006#sec-external-ent
(section 4.3.2) rules 77 and 78 the external general parses entity may have
zero or 1 occurence of a pattern ('<?xml' VersionInfo? EncodingDecl S?
'?>')? in an EBNF-context that happens to have received the rulename
TextDecl. 

[77] TextDecl?::= '<?xml' VersionInfo? EncodingDecl S? '?>'
[78]?extParsedEnt?::=?TextDecl? content

That is the TextDecl is optional.

The example was compliant after all.

So, now I'm confused! The xml output always renders an extParsedEnt [78],
while I had the impression that it renders a document [1].

The difference between

[23] XMLDecl?::= '<?xml' VersionInfo EncodingDecl? SDDecl? S? '?>'

and

[77] TextDecl?::= '<?xml' VersionInfo? EncodingDecl S? '?>'

is in the VersionInfo and SDDecl? rules.

Should I be using the xsl:output parameters to influence the final result?
I.e. By using <xsl:output method='xml' version='1.0' standalone='yes' .../>
I then render the result tree as a document [1]?

Would this then be a contradiction to the fact that the xml output always
renders a extParsedEnt [78]?

Besides that there are the doctype-public and doctype-system attributes in
the xsl:output element. These attributes are relevant to the document [1]
rule, but not the extParsedEnt [78] rule. This strenghtens my perception of
the fact that the xml output method renders a document [1] rather than an
extParsedEnt [78].

And why does the xml output method in one case omit the TextDecl [77] and in
an other insert it? What determines that behavior? Does it depend on Xalan?

With kind regards,
Peter Paulus


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