Re: Re: Un-cdata-section-elements

On 3/22/06, Nathan Young -X (natyoung - Artizen at Cisco)
<natyoung@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It looks like you could in fact omit the cdata tags.  As I understand,
> cdata tags are syntactic sugar that get you around having to escape all
> less than and greater than signs to entities, but from a validation
> perspective (or document tree model perspective) are transparent.

Again, the problem isn't the validity of the markup, but the
JavaScript as interpreted by various browsers; some processors
(possibly all?) will throw a CDATA around anything in the <script>
element by default, mostly because the chance of bumping into
non-valid stuff is high. (I assume some processors might do a
mini-validation on what's inside the script and only if it fails put
it in a CDATA section) I wanted to know if this was controllable
through XSLT 1.0 (because I know my little JavaScript stuff ain't got
no validation problems in them), but doesn't seem to be, which means
that *this* behaviour is guided by the processors.

Don't worry, though, I'm changing my tactic, I think. :)


Alex
--
"Ultimately, all things are known because you want to believe you know."
                                                         - Frank Herbert
__ http://shelter.nu/ __________________________________________________