Fine, but it's rare to have a service used by people receiving the content 
in a browser and copying it. Either it's retrieved programmatically or, 
occasionally, you cause the file to appear as a save/run option.

-- 

Joe Fawcett (MVP - XML)

http://joe.fawcett.name

"Hillbilly" <somebody@s...> wrote in message 
news:OFa7wbcSJHA.4680@T......
> Yes, that is a strategy in general --but-- my objective is to make the raw 
> XML available as the "free" results of a SaaS I am working on. I've 
> resorted to the following comment in each file:
>
> <!--
> NOTES:
>   1.) File Save menu -or- View Source "must" be used to copy
>       "all" XML which browsers may not display in new windows.
>   2.) W3C Official Feed Validation Service
>       http://validator.w3c.org/feed/
> -->
>
>
>
> "Joe Fawcett" <joefawcett@n...> wrote in message 
> news:ekRbpCWSJHA.1164@T......
>> You can always add a stylesheet reference to the XML if you want it 
>> styled differently. The identity transform would give a rough 
>> approximation of the raw XML.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Joe Fawcett (MVP - XML)
>>
>> http://joe.fawcett.name
>>
>> "Hillbilly" <somebody@s...> wrote in message 
>> news:%23PbM1hNSJHA.5056@T......
>>> <sigh> ;-)
>>>
>>> Furthermore, copy and paste from view source loses the formatting which 
>>> is retained
>>> "Martin Honnen" <mahotrash@y...> wrote in message 
>>> news:erYACyMSJHA.4916@T......
>>>> Hillbilly wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Did you know Firefox will not display raw XML (the entire collection 
>>>>> of nodes) in the same way IE will and does?
>>>>
>>>> Well both IE and Firefox have it flaws when they try to pretty-print 
>>>> XML documents. I prefer view source to see the raw XML.
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> Martin Honnen --- MVP XML
>>>> http://JavaScript.FAQTs.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>