Dear Joe,
You have opened a can of worms.  See the last Q&A at:
which shows you how to make the transformation work with MSXML, but I'm not sure the fragment identifier as namespace identifier ('#RowsetSchema') will work with Xalan.  The namespace issues that Microsoft have built into their ADO persisted XML have sparked long and controversial discussions among greater minds than ours.  Perhaps it's time to move to ADO.NET?
You say that you are "able to create XSL for normal transformations to HTML just fine", but I assume that you are using MSXML as your XSLT engine (probably through IE?).  Try using any other XSLT engine and I'll wager your "normal" transformation to HTML won't work.
BTW, is this really a question for fop-dev?  Perhaps you aren't aware of the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list...  Even then, the issue really has little to do with fop, being largely a general XSLT issue.  That is, you would have the same problem transforming ADO persisted XML to any schema, not just XSL-FO.
Still, happy to help initially.
Adrian Edwards
Netimpact Online Publishing
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Sytniak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 19 March 2002 10:22 AM
Subject: Colon character problematic in <xsl:template match="StringContainingColon"> ??

All -

I am using ADO to produce XML. This tends to get created as such:

    <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl"?>
    <xml xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882"
        xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema">
    <s:Schema id="RowsetSchema">
        ..... clipped schema elements
        <z:row atributes go here></z:row>

I am able to create XSL for normal transformations to HTML just fine. But in
order to get XSLFO to work, I must change the names of the 'rs:data' and
'z:row' nodes to something that does not contain a colon charater (ie.
rs-data & z-row). This seems to indicate that it is the colon character that
is causing the problem. Not sure if it could be anything else. I suppose I
could copy nodes to another more friendly node, but it seems that this
should not be necessary.

Anyone have a better way of dealing with this?


Joe Sytniak
Phase Forward, Inc.

Reply via email to