On Thu, 01 Nov 2012, Giovanni Di Milia wrote:
> In this way I have the the same XML I uploaded.
Sounds good then. However, we may need to test some more. E.g. (i) how
an unescaped `>' in the input XML file looks like after a few
insert-export cycles: is it staying the same? is it getting
double-escaped or something? (ii) how `a>b' in the input XML file
gets stored in bibxxx tables and hence gets indexed: literally as such?
or as `a>b'? (iii) how it is displayed? (Here we have a convention that
leading `<!--HTML-->' means the value is HTML and should be presented as
such.) I won't go into too much details here.
To study the difference in behaviour between `>' and `>' in the input
file, you can have a test record with something like:
<datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">first > second > third < fourth</subfield>
</datafield>
and check how the above things behave with the current code base and
after your changes.
Best regards
--
Tibor Simko
