Anne van Kesteren wrote:

> Razvan MIHAIU wrote:
>
>>> You need to declare some styles obviously. (Although you could make
>>> this work by adding <?xml-stylesheet?> right after the XML
>>> Declaration.
>>>
>> Indeed it is working. I have a couple of questions:
>>
>> 1. why do I need to add a style sheet ? I just want to have 2 XML 
>> documents and to establish a link between them. That is all.
>
>
> You need to define style so Mozilla knows how to render it. At least, 
> that is how it works now. It might be worth submitting a bug report 
> about styling documents using attributes from the XLink namespace by 
> default.

    You are speaking about an XSLT stylesheet ?
    In this case you must have at least a template matching the root 
element. That template should at least contain:

<xsl:apply-templates />

    To my understanding this is the bare minimum. From there the default 
templates will be applied, so the content of elements should be 
displayed. But if this is true then the content of my XLinkTest1 element 
will be displayed - the element will not be copied on the output as it 
is. That means that the result of this transformation will not contain 
any xlink code ! The result is that this should not work, but it does!!

    I do not understand.

    Perhaps somebody can explain what the effect of an empty style sheet 
declaration is.


>
>
>> 2. what "magic" is done by your empty style sheet declaration ? I
>> mean you don't even define a type for your style-sheet - like
>> "text/xsl";
>
>
>    I guess the renderer assumes that I want some sort of style. 

    Are we speaking about the same thing ? I am referring to XSLT style 
sheets. When you say "style" you could very well mean CSS. Perhaps there 
is some default CSS applied ! Hmm...

> Not sure
> why it does that though. (Note that although the psuedo-attribute is
> required, it is purely advisory and therefore isn't really important.
> Note also that text/xsl is just some IE hack.)

    Interesting. I will think about the implications of this.

>
>
>>>>>> FF tries to be a 'mainstream' browser, so, implementing
>>>>>> features that are not used by any site I know cannot be on
>>>>>> their priority list.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By any site *you* know?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, by any site I know.
>>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps I misunderstood, but did you said that because you consider
>>>  yourself a mainstream user or so?
>>>
>> I am sure that you can understand better from the context. Just try 
>> harder this time.
>
>
> Well, I thought you meant that the Firefox "website priority list" was
> pretty much the same to the sites you know and visit. That is why I was
> surprised and emphazed the word "you". I later figured that I might have
> misunderstood you and asked for some clarification.
>
    I never said "website priority list"; not even close.

>
>>>> You are quite an arrogant person, aren't you ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Care to explain?
>>>
>> You whole e-mail is build with a superiority tone. You don't say "FF
>>  supports simple links. Please provide a sample were this is failing"
>> but instead choose to say:
>>
>> "Really? What is your testcase for that?"
>
>
> I actually did say that. But you thought that Mozilla and Firefox were
> not the same. Perhaps I should not have assumed you to know that, sorry
> about that.

    Well, I just checked your web site. You seem to have a lot of 
knowledge about browsers - Mozilla in particular.
    Actually I believe that there are some subtle differences between 
them. Don't ask me for examples: I will have to scan the web for this 
info and I do not want to loose time with this issue now.

> Because it is easy to misunderstand people in an e-mail conversation.

    Yes, it can happen.


-- 
Regards,
Razvan

SCJP preparation material:

www.mihaiu.name/2004/sun_java_scjp_310_035/index.html
www.mihaiu.name/2004/sun_java_scjp_310_035_test1/index.html
www.mihaiu.name/2004/sun_java_scjp_310_035_test2/index.html
www.mihaiu.name/2004/sun_java_scjp_310_035_test3/index.html
www.mihaiu.name/2004/sun_java_scjp_310_035_test4/index.html