On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 01:57:11PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
> Ricardo Wurmus writes:
>
> > In that case we coud have FINISH-ELEMENT add all namespace declarations
> > that are in scope to the current node that is about to be returned. It
> > would be a little verbose, but more correct.
>
to...@tuxteam.de writes:
> As John has noted, the namespace mappings (i.e. the prefix -> namespace
> URI binding) are kind of lexically scoped (I'd call it subtree scoped,
> but structurally it is the same). While parsing is "easy" (assuming
> well-formed XML), serializing is not unambiguous.
T
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 09:44:02PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I just looked at this again and I think I came with something useful.
> Here’s some context:
[...]
> Attached is a patch that does the requested things. The parser
> procedures like FINISH-ELEMENT have access to all th
Ricardo Wurmus writes:
> In that case we coud have FINISH-ELEMENT add all namespace declarations
> that are in scope to the current node that is about to be returned. It
> would be a little verbose, but more correct.
Like this:
>From d44c702718baea4c4557d12ca8dd7dab724c7fb6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:0
Hi John,
> The trouble with that is that XML rnamespaces are lexically scoped, like
> Scheme
> local variables. It is perfectly valid to map a prefix to more than one
> URL,
> as long as the namespace declarations are in either disjoint or nested
> elements. So you don't know what the absolute
On Mon, Feb 4, 2019 at 3:45 PM Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
\I changed name->sxml to use only the namespace aliases / abbreviations
> instead of the namespace URIs.
The trouble with that is that XML rnamespaces are lexically scoped, like
Scheme
local variables. It is perfectly valid to map a prefix t
Hello!
I just looked at this again and I think I came with something useful.
Here’s some context:
Andy Wingo writes:
> Hi :)
>
> On Wed 13 Jul 2016 15:24, to...@tuxteam.de writes:
>
>> Referring to Oleg Kiseliov's paper [1], there are actually three
>> things involved:
>
> This summary is helpf
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:10:17PM +0200, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Hi :)
>
> On Wed 13 Jul 2016 15:24, to...@tuxteam.de writes:
>
> > Referring to Oleg Kiseliov's paper [1], there are actually three
> > things involved:
>
> This summary is helpful, thank
Hi :)
On Wed 13 Jul 2016 15:24, to...@tuxteam.de writes:
> Referring to Oleg Kiseliov's paper [1], there are actually three
> things involved:
This summary is helpful, thanks.
> What is missing? From my point of view:
>
> - At xml->sxml time, the user doesn't know which namespaces
>are in t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 03:24:03PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
[...]
> What is missing? From my point of view:
>
> - At xml->sxml time, the user doesn't know which namespaces
>are in the xml. So it would be nice if the XML parser
>could
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 09:32:16PM +0200, Andy Wingo wrote:
> See thread here as well:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/17709
>
> I like Ricardo's patch but have some comments here:
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/183
See thread here as well:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/17709
I like Ricardo's patch but have some comments here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel/18384
Andy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:25:09PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
[...]
> Reading again Oleg Kiselyov's paper[1] I understand that SXML can, as does
> XML have namespace abbreviations (called there user-ns-shortcut). It's not
> exctly the same thing,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 04:29:32PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> >> Since xml->sxml accepts a namespace alist I suppose it would make sense
> >> to extend sxml->xml to do the same.
>
> Attached is a minimal patch to extend "sxml->xml" such that it ac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 09:04:46AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>
> to...@tuxteam.de writes:
>
> > What's yet missing (as far as I can read off the diff) is a way to
> > "dream up" an abbreviation when it's not in the namespaces alist.
>
> True.
>
to...@tuxteam.de writes:
> What's yet missing (as far as I can read off the diff) is a way to
> "dream up" an abbreviation when it's not in the namespaces alist.
True.
Ideally, this should work even without passing a namespaces alist at all
in both "xml->sxml" and "sxml->xml". The non-abbrevia
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 04:29:32PM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> >> Since xml->sxml accepts a namespace alist I suppose it would make sense
> >> to extend sxml->xml to do the same.
>
> Attached is a minimal patch to extend "sxml->xml" such that it ac
>> Since xml->sxml accepts a namespace alist I suppose it would make sense
>> to extend sxml->xml to do the same.
Attached is a minimal patch to extend "sxml->xml" such that it accepts an
optional keyword argument "namespaces" with an alist of prefixes to
URLs, analogous to "xml->sxml".
When the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:24:03AM +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Hi Tomás,
>
> to...@tuxteam.de writes:
>
> > When transforming SXML to XML, namespaces don't seem to be handled
> > properly:
> >
> [...]
> >
> > The problem is that SXML used the conc
Hi Tomás,
to...@tuxteam.de writes:
> When transforming SXML to XML, namespaces don't seem to be handled
> properly:
>
[...]
>
> The problem is that SXML used the concatenated (full) namespace with the
> name as tag (and attribute) names for namespaced items. When serializing
> to XML it should tr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I posted more details on guile-devel. Perhaps this was the wrong list?
When transforming SXML to XML, namespaces don't seem to be handled
properly:
#!/usr/bin/guile -s
!#
(use-modules (sxml simple))
;; An XML with two namespaces (one
21 matches
Mail list logo
