This is the mail archive of the
docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list .
Re: Re: needing clarification about XSL transformation
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:59:18 -0500 (EST)
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday at mindspring dot com> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Vitaly Ostanin wrote:
>
> > With this style xslt-processor must not copy comments and PI.
> > This style not overriding built-in templates, so saxon is
> > incorrect.
>
> ah, so as i read this, the conflict resolution is that,
> even if i have a template that matches "node()", that will
> be overridden by the more explicit built-in rule that matches
> "comment()" explicitly, whose effect is to do nothing with
> the comment.
Sometime I see in spec "node", sometime -- "element"... :(
> perhaps it's just kay's wording, but in his book at the
> bottom of p. 315, he writes (after a list of how template
> matching is done):
I don't read this book, but I believe in
http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt
:)
> "If there are *no* [my emphasis] templates that match
> the selected node, the built-in template for the relevant
> node type is used."
>
> the way i read this is that the "node()" test *would*
> match a comment(), and thus my template would be used.
> apparently, that's not what he meant, but you can see
> how it could be interpreted that way, i hope.
node() is not a comment, not PI, not attribute - it just node
like
<node/>
comment() is just a comment like
<!-- comment -->
processing-instruction() is just PI like
<?... ?>
--
Regards, Vyt
mailto: vyt at vzljot dot ru
JID: vyt at vzljot dot ru