[whatwg] XSLT and DOCTYPES
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Thu Dec 18 11:34:51 PST 2008
Elliotte Harold wrote:
> Since XSLT 1.0 can generate well-formed XHTML without any problems,
> there really is no need for this at all. Documents generated by XSLT
> that need to be conforming should simply be XHTML.
Now if you can persuade Microsoft to implement XHTML, that might fly.
> Furthermore, it is false that XSLT cannot generate an HTML 5 conforming
> DOCTYPE in HTML mode. As proof I present this stylesheet:
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0"
> <xsl:output indent="yes" method="html"/>
> <xsl:template match="/">
> <xsl:text disable-output-escaping='yes'><!DOCTYPE HTML></xsl:text>
> and the following output:
> $ xsltproc test.xsl http://www.cafeconleche.org/
> <!DOCTYPE HTML><html></html>
Doesn't work with Firefox' builtin XSLT engine which ignores d-o-e (and
is allowed to do so).
> Most importantly, does it really make sense to add ever more cruft not
> the spec to support every legacy tool and language out there? What if we
> discover that K&R C won't do Unicode? or that some old versions of Java
> require tags to be upper cased? A spec like this should not be making
> special allowances for the languages that may be used to generate it.
> This time I will request a specific action: delete this section
> completely. It has no place in the spec.
I totally disagree.
The spec also fails to mention that there are more use cases than XSLT;
several HTML serialization methods share this restriction with XSLT's
HTML output mode. Thus, the spec should continue to allow this, but pick
a more correct name.
More information about the whatwg