FWIW, I agree. I've always thought that XSLT should be able to produce
human readable entities in the output. So far I have been able to live
without it. Only I learned the hex equivalent to . But even so, I
still feel that XSLT should be able to produce an entity of any sort in the
output. Perhaps an <xsl:entity name=".."/> type of element. I mean, you
can create processing instructions, elements, attributes and comments; why
leave entities out of the mix?
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: naha@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:naha@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 2:22 PM
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; David Carlisle
Subject: Re: use cases for d-o-e
Quoting David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>:
One of the reasons for adopting an XML notation is so that such
intermediate documents are human-readable.
I'm curious why the XML infoset didn't provide for unexpanded entity
references. Aside from being parsed and serialized, the only other
operation they'd need to support is name().
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
Joerg Pietschmann - Thu, 10 Jan 2002 10:36:33 -0500 (EST)
KIENLE, STEVEN C [IT/0200] - Thu, 10 Jan 2002 14:37:06 -0500 (EST) <=
|
|
Cart
