Hussein: > Yes, and it *really* works (XMLmind XML Editor is > not buggy software): > simply remove the "values" field. Note that for this > to work, "type" > must really be a ``pure enumeration'' (i.e. no > union). >
I didn't mean to imply that. On the contrary, I'm quite impressed with XMLMind. > Excerpts of form-sampler.xsd and form-sampler.css This is a great source of information. Thank you. > You have written "...\A\DpageTypeC". What is "\A\D"? > It should be "\A " > (with a space after the "\A"). See > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/syndata.html#q4 > I agree that this is highly non-intuitive, but it is > the standard. > Ooops. My bad. > > Using your xpath suggestion from below, I found > > another way: > > > > graphic:before { > > display: block; > > content: paragraph(content(image(attr(src)), > > xpath("./alt"))); > > } > > > > Oddly enough, it doesn't work the same using the > > almost identical > > > > graphic { > > display: block; > > content: paragraph(content(image(attr(src)), > > xpath("./alt"))); > > } > > > > The alt is not displaying in the 2nd case. Is > there a > > reason? > > May be the above "graphic" rule conflicts with > another "graphic" rule, > while the "graphic:before" rule does not. I doubt > that you can find a > bug here. Maybe I'm just a bit confused here: This works: graphic:before { display: block; content: paragraph(content(image(attr(src), -400, -100, smooth), xpath("./alt"))); } and this works - the text is red: graphic:before { display: block; content: paragraph(content(image(attr(src), -400, -100, smooth), xpath("./alt"))); } graphic { color: red; } but this doesn't - no alt text: graphic { display: block; content: paragraph(content(image(attr(src), -400, -100, smooth), xpath("./alt"))); } Also, can the two rules tag:first-of-type:before {...content:...} and tag:before {...content:...} co-exist? It appears that the first <tag> is only matched by the first selector, whereas all other <tag>s are matched by the latter. Is this expected behavior? > The only possible issue is the above memory leak, > which I cannot > reproduce easily (in fact, I can't believe you have > found a memory > leak). I suggest to increase the heap settings > *and*, if you can, > upgrade to latest version. I've put in a purchase order. Thanks again for all your answers. Andreas __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
