This is the mail archive of the xsl-list@mulberrytech.com mailing list .
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
> I was under the impression that it was an oversight in XSLT > 1.0 that the HTML > output method, by its requirement to not differ from the XML > output method > except in certain specified manners, required the > serialization of namespace > nodes as xmlns attributes. > > However, upon reviewing the HTML output section of the XSLT > 2.0 WD, I see that > this behavior has been prescribed even more formally than before: > > "The html output method should not output an element > differently from the xml > output method unless the expanded-name of the element has a > null namespace > URI; an element whose expanded-name has a non-null namespace > URI should be output as XML." Unless my eyes deceive me, this sentence is unchanged between the XSLT 1.0 specification and the XSLT 2.0 working draft. > > What is the rationale behind this? > > I disagree with it, whatever it is :) > As a matter of historical fact, I don't know what the original rationale was. I have assumed in the past, with no particular evidence, that it was done for the convenience of the users of products that allow HTML documents to contain XML data islands. I can't see any particular reason for doing anything else with elements that are not part of the HTML specification, unless we adopt the draconian step of saying that everything output by the HTML output method must be valid HTML. Michael Kay Software AG home: Michael.H.Kay@ntlworld.com work: Michael.Kay@softwareag.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |