Arjun Ray scripsit:
> True. As far as this idea goes, it's probably "safer" to have the
> attribute assert "XSLTness" rather than "literalness".
How is this explicit attribute in each element to be distinguished from
a convention whereby we insert a *single* attribute into the document
which says "Any element whose GI begins with the following characters
has XSLTness?"
> However, the notion of a reserved discriminator within XSLT doesn't quite
> solve the problem of a XSLT stylesheet producing another - where the
> discrimination semantic is needed in the output and so the attribute would
> have to appear in the sheet "literally".
XSLT as it actually is resolves this problem with a name (not merely
attribute) renaming facility, which says "When an element GI or attribute
name begins with the following characters, it is literal, but on output
it is converted to begin as follows."
--
My confusion is rapidly waxing John Cowan
For XML Schema's too taxing:
I'd use DTDs http://www.reutershealth.com
If they had local trees -- http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
I think I best switch to RELAX NG.
