On 1/18/2016 9:49 PM, Kate F wrote:
On 18 January 2016 at 19:13, Hans Hagen <pra...@wxs.nl> wrote:
On 1/18/2016 5:22 PM, Kate F wrote:
On 18 January 2016 at 13:30, Thomas A. Schmitz
<thomas.schm...@uni-bonn.de> wrote:
On 01/17/2016 07:24 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
it should work in the in beta now
Hi Hans,
now I have a problem :-) What should take precedence if an entity is both
defined in the dtd and as a \xmltexentity? The way I see it, the latter:
e.g., in the DTD, I might declare something for use in a browser but
require
a different solution when typesetting with ConTeXt. The latest and
greatest
now takes my DTD definitions instead of the \xmltexentities, which did
not
happen before. Is that an unwanted side effect or the new default?
Ah, there's a bug:
<!ENTITY i.opt "<option>-i</option>">
This should produce an <option> node in the DOM tree, just as if you'd
typed that out where the entity is used. Currently ConTeXt takes that
as literal text, as if you'd typed "<option>-i<option/>"
Often I wish XML weren't so complex...
are you sure? i've never seen that
Hans
Yep!
These are called "internal parsed entities". "Parsed" requires that
any tags *inside* the entity must be balanced, unlike in SGML
entities.
Sorry I can't find a clear explanation in the XML spec; it's a pretty
confusing document.
But here's some random person's slide illustrating an example:
http://images.slideplayer.com/23/6622270/slides/slide_47.jpg
libxml2 deals with these correctly, which is what I've been using
(xsltproc and friends) for my documents which use them. I generally
trust libxml2 to get things right.
I use these entities to centralise often-repeated fragments between
documents, kind of like how you might use a primitive macro in TeX.
So for example in one external DTD I have some general things:
<!ENTITY macro.arg "<replaceable>macro</replaceable>">
<!ENTITY equal.lit "<literal>=</literal>">
And then in one specific document's internal entities, something which
uses them:
<!ENTITY D2.opt
"<option>-D</option>¯o.arg;&equal.lit;<replaceable>defn</replaceable>">
Then if I change my mind about how I want to mark up "=", for example,
I only have one place to change it. This makes life with XML a little
bit less painful.
well, i've learned not to trust all these docs on the web too much and
applications can do what they want (and thereby even influence standards)
xml pocket reference:
- parsed entity: replacement text that can be referenced
internal: literal string to be injected (then the example
shows only text and entities
in your example you use a (decimal) character entity ... the link you
give says that you cannot use & and % as part of the entities value so
that would mean your example is wrong
of course we can consider an option to parse the entity as xml
(we can consider < as a trigger for parsing thereby kin dof
automatically adapting)
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
