Re: l "& #xA0; vs & #160;" version 2 proposal.

On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 08:29:41AM +0100, DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Considering the number of questions this raises,
> How many rules would be broken if   were added
> to an XSLT engine? I.e. put in as part of the rec?
> 

Well, for one thing,   is not an internally-defined XML entity
(the way & and < are).  Conceivably you could create another
entity in a different dialect of XML where   meant something
other than the Unicode character  , and if this were included in
the XSLT standard, there would be no way of creating this other entity
in a stylesheet, because it would then *always* produce &#xa0.

Oh, and by the way, XSLT *does* include  , if your output method
is HTML that is. :)

-- 
Rafael R. Sevilla <sevillar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>   +63(2)   8177746 ext. 8311
Programmer, InterdotNet Philippines              +63(917) 4458925
http://dido.engr.internet.org.ph/                OpenPGP Key ID: 0x5CDA17D8

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature