Re: XPATH evaluation
От | Radosław Smogura |
---|---|
Тема | Re: XPATH evaluation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 201106181851.26516.rsmogura@softperience.eu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: XPATH evaluation (Nicolas Barbier <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Nicolas Barbier <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com> Friday 17 of June 2011 17:29:57 > 2011/6/17, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>: > > On 06/17/2011 10:55 AM, Radosław Smogura wrote: > >> XML canonization preservs whitespaces, if I remember > >> well, I think there is example. > >> > >> In any case if I will store image in XML (I've seen this), preservation > >> of white spaces and new lines is important. > > > > If you store images you should encode them anyway, in base64 or hex. > > Whitespace that is not at certain obviously irrelevant places (such as > right after "<", between attributes, outside of the whole document, > etc), and that is not defined to be irrelevant by some schema (if the > parser is schema-aware), is relevant. You cannot just muck around with > it and consider that correct. > > > More generally, data that needs that sort of preservation should > > possibly be in CDATA nodes. > > CDATA sections are just syntactic sugar (a form of escaping): > > <URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset/#omitted> > > "Appendix D: What is not in the Information Set > [..] > 19. The boundaries of CDATA marked sections." > > Therefore, there is not such thing as a "CDATA node" that would be > different from "just text" (Infoset-wise). > > Note that that does not mean that binary data is never supposed to be > altered or that all binary data is to be accepted: e.g., whether > newlines are represented using "\n", "\r", or "\r\n" is irrelevant; > also, binary data that is not valid according to the used encoding > must of course not be accepted. > > Nicolas I would like to send patch to remove formatting. How to deal with collapsing blank nodes I don't know. Regards, Radek
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: