On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Jon Stevens <latch...@gmail.com> wrote: > However, the character that went into the attribute was not a \n, it was a > . I'd expect ant to give me back out, not \n. The point of > <echoxml> is to echo xml, is it not? In that case, the point here should be > to echo out the encoded value as xml, not something that is useless.
Jon, in XML land *is* \n, whatever you say about it. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_XML_and_HTML_character_entity_references You *can* have a plain '\n' char (i.e. an actual LF, not '\\' and 'n') in XML, and for the parser that's the *same*. Furthermore, whatever you feed your <echoxml>-generated XML file to, will / should not care either whether it see a '\n' or a " " if it uses a compliant XML parser. Don't get hand up on the textual representation of the XML file. This <foo> </foo> and this <foo> </foo> is exactly the same thing as far as XML is concerned. If you absolutely want your in the <echoxml> output, you must follow Antoine's advice. I suggest you read more on XML and again Ant, for better or worse, uses an XML parser so will only see '\n' and not your XML char entity. --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
