Thanks Dimitry!  I'm off to the races!

BTW, I hope to work out a complete xalan example of doing this.  I'll send a
copy to you.

Roger


----- Original Message -----
From: "Voytenko, Dimitry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Roger I Martin PhD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 5:18 PM
Subject: RE: xml with DOCTYPE defined and getting the root element


Hi,

if you expect your
<xsl:apply-templates />
in line 49 to match template:
<xsl:template match="math" name="math">
in line 9, it's not gonna do that. Your root element is defined in the math
namespace.
You need to change it to (note "math:")
<xsl:template match="math:math" name="math">

For further references I'd advise to change your stylesheet to:

<xsl:output method="xml"/>
<xsl:template match="/">
<xsl:copy-of select="."/>
</xsl:template>

just to see what your source document looks like after it's been processed
by xml parser.

thanks,
Dimitry

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger I Martin PhD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 13:48
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: xml with DOCTYPE defined and getting the root element


Yes but when I go for the element child either with match="/*" or
apply-templates, no further template matching occurs.

apply-templates of any kind don't work.  There must be something else I am
doing wrong.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Kesselman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: xml with DOCTYPE defined and getting the root element


>
>
>
>
> In XPath/XSLT terms, the "document root" is the same thing the DOM calls
> the Document Node, or SAX calls the Document event. If you want the
> top-level element, you need to retrieve the element child of the root
node.
>
> ______________________________________
> Joe Kesselman, IBM Next-Generation Web Technologies: XML, XSL and more.
> "The world changed profoundly and unpredictably the day Tim Berners Lee
> got bitten by a radioactive spider." -- Rafe Culpin, in r.m.filk
>
>



Reply via email to