xml-dev - Re: XLink transformations

[Ben Trafford <ben@legendary.org>]

At 08:26 AM 7/18/00 +0100, Martin Bryan wrote:
>Its interesting that you've raised this issue with the XLink group as I've 
>just raised a similar issue with the XInclude group (what happens if the 
>included object has an attached stylesheet - what is its scope?). They 
>pointed out to me that xsl-stylesheet PIs are only valid if the occur in 
>the prolog, so any included stylesheet calls are invalid. Presumably the 
>same applies to documents that are linked to another document as the PI 
>therefore does not get placed in the combined tree at a valid point. The 
>question I raised was whether it shouldn't be a requirement that PIs that 
>are known to be invalid in context be stripped from the inclusion tree.

         That's news to me, Martin. The Infoset (upon which XInclude is 
based) allows for information items to be passed about the prolog. XInclude 
does not prohibit the prolog information to be passed during the inclusion, 
and since it merges infosets, one must assume that the prolog information 
is also passed. Since PIs are legal at any point in an XML document, it is 
premature to assume that they are automatically invalidated by their 
presence within the document. It seems to me that it would behoove the XML 
Core WG to consider the merging of informat

         Therefore, my initial take on the issue stands, unless XInclude is 
modified to preclude the passing of prolog information. In my opinion, this 
would be a mistake. The prolog contains useful information, including the 
stylesheet PI. It seems to me that it would behoove the XML Core WG to 
consider the merging of information found in the prolog in a compatible way.

         In other words, the stylesheet call is valid, according to 
infosets and XInclude. The real question is: how to handle it, since 
multiple stylesheet calls are quite valid in XSL. The only invalid part is 
placing the stylesheet PI outside of the prolog.

--->Ben Trafford