This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: l "& #xA0; vs & #160;" version 2 proposal.
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: RE: [xsl]l "& #xA0; vs & #160;" version 2 proposal.
- From: DPawson at rnib dot org dot uk
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 10:57:20 +0100
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> From: Michael Beddow
> I'm not clear as to what this would solve. To me, it looks as though
> most of the problems stem from misunderstandings about how
> XML parsers
> handle character data, and the stages in the transformation process at
> which parsing and serialisation occur. People's problems in this area
> won't go away until they grasp what's at stake there, and
> mandating that
> XSLT processors when serialising into HTML must always represent
> NO-BREAK SPACE as would surely be muffling the symptoms instead
> of curing the ill?
OK OK, I back off :-)
I thought it not unreasonable.
The reasons given prove it to be so.
Regards DaveP
*********snip here***************
-
NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the
intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use,
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your
system.
RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any
attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it
cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.
Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of RNIB.
RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227
Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list