Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 98309 invoked by uid 500); 16 Aug 2003 03:55:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org Received: (qmail 98285 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2003 03:55:07 -0000 Received: from out005pub.verizon.net (HELO out005.verizon.net) (206.46.170.143) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Aug 2003 03:55:07 -0000 Received: from verizon.net ([138.88.37.182]) by out005.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id <20030816035517.KUMQ15786.out005.verizon.net@verizon.net> for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:55:17 -0500 Message-ID: <3F3DAB22.40607@verizon.net> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 23:55:14 -0400 From: Vadim Gritsenko User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dev@cocoon.apache.org Subject: Re: HTMLGenerator References: <000a01c3630b$0112b860$db506bc2@WRPO> <3F3CD3C7.4040700@verizon.net> <3F3D02BB.3020007@verizon.net> <3F3D65BA.1010907@gmx.de> <3F3D6DEE.7050607@gmx.de> <3F3D73E1.9000309@verizon.net> <3F3D9012.9050404@gmx.de> <3F3DA09D.6070306@leverageweb.com> In-Reply-To: <3F3DA09D.6070306@leverageweb.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out005.verizon.net from [138.88.37.182] at Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:55:16 -0500 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Geoff Howard wrote: > Joerg Heinicke wrote: > > ... > >> GOT IT!!! >> >> What ever node type this should be: >> this is the reason for the exception. Why the explicite XPath works? >> I don't know ... At other places in the same file these constructs >> are placed in comments and don't disturb: To >> which language do these constructs belong? > > > You mean you don't use the "Downlevel-revealed Conditional Comment" > and the "Downlevel-hidden Conditional Comment" every day? When I > first ran into this I was quite confused but google came to the rescue: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/overview/ccomment_ovw.asp > > Basically, IIRC it's a microsoft extension to html which is a > conditional evaluated by the browser. The two have different meanings > that I haven't quite taken the time to grasp. Do they use it on every > page? How about switching to google or cnn? EEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!! Switch to google *immediately*! Say, http://directory.google.com/ -- that's what we were pulling from yahoo Vadim