- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:41:52 GMT
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
following up on an earlier comment (and Michael Kay's reply) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2004Aug/0086.html I see in the new XSLT draft that unparsed-text() doesn't normalize line ends. I think normalizing would be better but I can live with this. A new example has been added to clarify that line ends are not normalized, which is good (if they are not to be normalized) however it says... Note that the unparsed-text function does not normalize line endings. This example has therefore been written to recognize both Unix and Windows conventions for end-of-line, namely a single newline (#x0A) character or a carriage return / line feed pair (#x0D #x0A). This explicitly leaves out Mac users and more importantly I think the example ought to show the equivalent normalization to XML 1.0 (and describe it as such, rather than by reference to specific operating systems) XML 1.0 (3ed) http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-line-ends says To simplify the tasks of applications, the XML processor MUST behave as if it normalized all line breaks in external parsed entities (including the document entity) on input, before parsing, by translating both the two-character sequence #xD #xA and any #xD that is not followed by #xA to a single #xA character. So I think that <xsl:for-each select="tokenize(unparsed-text($in), '\r?\n|\r')"> ... </xsl:for-each> would do the right thing, given tokenize's "first option wins" rule. Of course XML 1.1 throws NEL and LS into the mix as well, but this is just an example and I think reference to XML 1.0 is sufficient (and XML 1.1 should never have changed the white space rules:-) David ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 12:42:32 UTC