John L. Clark wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 04:25:49PM +0200, Hussein Shafie wrote: > >>I didn't want to be arrogant. I know that there are plenty of other XML >>softwares which understand <?xml-stylesheet?>. I meant: why is the >>xml-stylesheet processing instruction still useful *in the case of XXE*, >>when you have configuration files? > > > I think simply and practically, when one is dealing with styles targeted > towards a particular document, using this processing instruction is > easier (on both the developer/guru and the end user) than the XXE > configuration files. For example (this is why I found myself using the > xml-stylesheet processing instruction recently), I had a large DocBook > file that my group wanted to look a particular way. To me, it didn't > make sense to craft a configuration for only this document, so I turned > to the xml-stylesheet processing instruction to supply a simple > augmentation of the XXE core styles. > > There certainly may be other use-cases, although in general I much > prefer XXE's way of inspecting a document's structure and applying an > appropriate configuration. I'm investigating techniques for obtaining > similar behavior in other environments. > > >>Another question is: has anybody succeeded in using the same CSS style >>sheet for XXE and for another <?xml-stylesheet?>-enabled XML software? >>In such case, no longer supporting <?xml-stylesheet?> in XXE V3 would be >>an error. > > > This is where my XML catalog request comes into play. I invision being > able to specify a global URI for a particular stylesheet and having > application specific resolution of that stylesheet's URI. One possible > implementation of such a resolution is through XML catalogs, which are > great for this sort of task and which XXE has a history of supporting.
OK. You convinced us. We'll add this feature in the near future (V2.8 or V2.8p1).
