|
From: Sven E. <sve...@we...> - 2001-10-14 07:49:22
|
er...@go... schrieb am 14.10.01:
> Sven Ehrke wrote:
> >
> > > Actually at first I thought of writing:
> > >
> > > <getest config="getest.cfg" compile="geant compile_ise >
> > > xcompile.log 2>&1"/>
> > >
> > > but when I looked at the XML parser code, it didn't seem
> > > to interpret entities like that. Does it?
> >
> > I am not sure if I understood you correctly.
>
> Of course you cannot understand: it seems that the entities
> that I put in my previous message have been interpreted
> either on my side or your side by the mail tool. Here is
> again what I wrote, in the hope that it will appear correctly
> this time:
>
> <getest config="getest.cfg"
> compile="geant compile_ise > xcompile.log 2>&1"/>
Sorry for my stupidity but I still cannot see the
xml entity in the compile attribute.
2>&1
is not an xml-entity. Examples for entities I can think of are:
© for the copyright sign (c)
< for <
These are the entities like they are used in HTML for
example. Then one can define own entities like this:
<!ENTITY gobo "GOBO Eiffel">
This is &gobo;
So with the support of entities it probably would look like this
(I hope it comes through the mail proberly):
<getest config="getest.cfg"
compile="geant compile_ise > xcompile.log 2>&1"/>
Maybe the ampersand has to replaced by an entity as well (I cannot
remeber the symbol for it right now). But personally I find
the CDATA version more readable.
>
> > If you are talking about
> > xml entities you are right: they are not handled.
>
> But they should, no?
Yes, would be nice. But the current implementation does not support
many features of a professional XML parser. But we can add missing
features as we need them. So to solve the current problem I would
rather suggest to use CDATA.
- Sven
_______________________________________________________________________
1.000.000 DM gewinnen - kostenlos tippen - http://millionenklick.web.de
Ih...@we..., 8MB Speicher, Verschluesselung - http://freemail.web.de
|