html can be tedious, but you could minimize the impact by flattening text inside the first element and not include the sub-elements. For example HTML:
<p>This is <i>stupid</i> example and this isnt actually allowed but anyways: <ol><li>Any</li><li>problems?</li></ol></p> In this case only the first p-instance would have the flattened literal: "This is stupid example. And this isnt actually allowed but anyways: Any problems?". So, in worst case, there would be only one sxml:mixedContent literal containing whole text content of the xml document. keskiviikko, 18. kesäkuuta 2014 10.13.35 UTC+3 Holger Knublauch kirjoitti: > > On 6/18/2014 17:03, amiika wrote: > > i still think it would be better to include flattened texts properties > > to sxml from mixed content. > > I thought about this and this would make a lot of sense for some use > cases. A problem is that for example in typical HTML files those > sxml:mixedContent literals would carry a lot of content (may become very > large, with exponential size due to the recursive nature). While this > could be an optional feature, SXML in general tries to get along without > something like "options". > > Question: should those values be just the content of the (nested) text > nodes or shall nested elements also be included? > > Holger > > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise Vocabulary Network (EVN), TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion, SPARQL Web Pages and SPIN. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-users?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
