[xslt] RE: [xml] periods legal in an NMTOKEN
- From: "David Cramer" <dcramer broadjump com>
- To: <veillard redhat com>
- Cc: <xslt gnome org>, <xml gnome org>
- Subject: [xslt] RE: [xml] periods legal in an NMTOKEN
- Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 17:19:54 -0500
Sigh. I prepared a small test case and xsltproc does fine with NMTOKENs.
Apparently it's something else--either a bug in our xsl that Saxon
misses or a bug in xsltproc that our stuff reveals. I'll try to get a
test case that's small enough to be useful.
Any chance there's a hidden --quiet switch on xsltproc? It processes the
document fine, despite its complaints.
From: Daniel Veillard [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 4:29 PM
To: David Cramer
Cc: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: [xml] periods legal in an NMTOKEN
On Tue, Sep 10, 2002 at 01:24:18PM -0500, David Cramer wrote:
> We have a dtd with attributes defined as NMTOKEN. When the attribute
> values have periods in them, we get the error:
> "validity error: standalone: foo on bar value had to be normalized
> on external subset declaration"
> Our processing system is designed to die on the word error (some other
> xsl processors aren't so nice with their exit codes). If I change
> NMTOKEN to CDATA in the DTD, we no longer get the error but that
> other problems.
> Looking at the spec, I think periods should be ok in an NMTOKEN:
Right, give me a sample test case according to
Then I will look into it,
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
email@example.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
] [Thread Prev