I am trying to get xsp to work but if I use .xsp extension all I get is
the code back in the page and in the log file it says it does not appear
to be an xml file.
If I use .xml I get a internal server error. I am using the following
code
http://www.apache.org/1999/XSP/Core";
xmlns:util="h
Tim Peoples wrote:
>
> Thanks for the info!
>
> I took a look at your module and realized that I didn't really want to
> parse the user agent string inside XSLT. Therefore, I used your code as
> a catalyst for the following quick and dirty hack.
:-)
I'd be willing to integrate your code in
Thanks for the info!
I took a look at your module and realized that I didn't really want to
parse the user agent string inside XSLT. Therefore, I used your code as
a catalyst for the following quick and dirty hack.
I include this here in case anyone else finds it useful. Sorry for the
lack of
No, not really. Just read perldoc DBI::Sybase and try to connect.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Ray Carlino
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 4/8/02 9:10 AM
Subject: sample database connection config
I am just starting to use axkit and connect to a database can someone
send me some starting
Le grande pinguin said at 17:46 8-4-2002:
> > Yes, and because it's the core reason for creating the XHTML-spec:
> > To create Well-formed XML, that is backwards compatible, with existing
> > user-agents.
>
>Interessting view, but as i read the documentation the main rationale behind
>the xhtml d
>
> Exactly, so why do we need method="xhtml"??? we don't really...
In mode html, quoting from Michale Kay's book...
'HTML attributes whose value is a URI (for example, the href attribute
of the element, or the src attribute of the element) are
recognized, and special characters within the UR
Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
> At 17:05 8-4-2002, Christopher H. Laco shared with all of us:
>
>> Well, let me play devil's advocate then
>>
>> If XHTML is valid XML via method="xml". why on earth is method="xhtml"
>> added to the 2.0 working draft?
[...]
>>
>> #2. In XHTML != , while in XML it do
On Monday 08 April 2002 11:05, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
> Well, let me play devil's advocate then
>
> If XHTML is valid XML via method="xml". why on earth is method="xhtml"
> added to the 2.0 working draft?
A lot of useless stuff gets into working drafts, trust me...
>
> Two reasons I can t
I am just starting to use axkit and connect to a database can someone
send me some starting pints please.
I am using freetds and compiled the dbi::sybase with it.
I am connection to a microsoft sql database
Do I need to add anything to the freetds config?
Thanks Ray
---
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 11:05:13AM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
> Well, let me play devil's advocate then
>
> If XHTML is valid XML via method="xml". why on earth is method="xhtml" added
> to the 2.0 working draft?
XML is a syntax, XHMTL a dialect ... ?
> Two reasons I can think of..
>
Hi Tim,
What you seek is already implemented in
AxKit-Plugin-AddXSLParams-Request[1]. One of these days, I'll get around
to shoving it out to CPAN. See the docs for usage, if you have any
questions or comments, please feel free.
-kip
[1]
http://hampton.ws/download/files/Apache-AxKit-Plugin-AddX
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 05:18:47PM +0200, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
> At 17:05 8-4-2002, Christopher H. Laco shared with all of us:
>
> >Well, let me play devil's advocate then
> >
> >If XHTML is valid XML via method="xml". why on earth is method="xhtml" added
> >to the 2.0 working draft?
> >
> >
At 17:05 8-4-2002, Christopher H. Laco shared with all of us:
>Well, let me play devil's advocate then
>
>If XHTML is valid XML via method="xml". why on earth is method="xhtml" added
>to the 2.0 working draft?
>
>Two reasons I can think of..
>#1. text/xml vs. text/html content-type.
>
Well, let me play devil's advocate then
If XHTML is valid XML via method="xml". why on earth is method="xhtml" added
to the 2.0 working draft?
Two reasons I can think of..
#1. text/xml vs. text/html content-type.
Can be fixed vy using media-type="text/html", assuming the processor us
I currently have a snippet of code that parses the HTTP_USER_AGENT env
variable and sets a short attribute on the root element of my XML document
(this is done in Mason using Apache::Filter).
I would much rather this be done by Apache itself and have it pass a
parameter to the toplevel styleshee
On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 10:37, Tod Harter wrote:
> On Saturday 06 April 2002 13:00, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
> > > But you need to tell Mozilla how to display the XML and it doesn't
> > > support XSL sheets (yet).
>
> Uh, well you might THINK so, but its ne
On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:58:30AM -0400, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
> While I agree on the concept, the reality is not as correct.
> Please define "properly design your stylesheet"?
>
> My biggest beef with XSLT processors is they do to much thinking for me and
> not enough DWIM-ing.
> I want to
While I agree on the concept, the reality is not as correct.
Please define "properly design your stylesheet"?
My biggest beef with XSLT processors is they do to much thinking for me and
not enough DWIM-ing.
I want to be able to select, print, and arrange things [read:
elements/attributes], NO hav
At 15:35 8-4-2002, Tod Harter shared with all of us:
>Doesn't actually matter. There is no "official" xhtml output method either.
>XSLT 1.1 draft as of the latest one I read didn't include it. The reasoning
>being that if you properly design your stylesheet then the html method will
>work fine an
On Saturday 06 April 2002 13:00, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
> > But you need to tell Mozilla how to display the XML and it doesn't
> > support XSL sheets (yet).
Uh, well you might THINK so, but its never actually worked, at least not on
any version I've used
Doesn't actually matter. There is no "official" xhtml output method either.
XSLT 1.1 draft as of the latest one I read didn't include it. The reasoning
being that if you properly design your stylesheet then the html method will
work fine and should output legal xhtml.
On Saturday 06 April 200
21 matches
Mail list logo
