Shashank M Tanksali

Greenhorn
+ Follow
since Jan 18, 2002
Merit badge: grant badges
For More
Cows and Likes
Cows
Total received
In last 30 days
0
Forums and Threads

Recent posts by Shashank M Tanksali

DTD
You cannot validate a DTD. You can only validate an XML document, which references a DTD.
You can download xerces from http://xml.apache.org
-Shashank
You could use the below stylesheet for getting your desired output.
However do note that the stylesheet below can be reduced to one third of it's size by putting all the repetitive code into a common template and invoking it.
<xsl:template match="/">
<xsl:apply-templates select="source"/>
</xsl:template>
<xsl:template match="source">
<xsl:element name="{name(.)}">
<xsl:for-each select="@*">
<xsl:attribute name = "{name(.)}" >
</xsl:attribute>
</xsl:for-each>
<xsl:text> </xsl:text>
<xsl:apply-templates select="name"/>
</xsl:element>
</xsl:template>
<xsl:template match="name">
<xsl:element name="{name(.)}">
<xsl:for-each select="@*">
<xsl:attribute name = "{name(.)}" >
</xsl:attribute>
</xsl:for-each>
<xsl:text> </xsl:text>
<xsl:apply-templates select="name1"/>
</xsl:element>
</xsl:template>
<xsl:template match="name1">
<xsl:element name="{name(.)}">
<xsl:for-each select="@*">
<xsl:attribute name = "{name(.)}" >
</xsl:attribute>
</xsl:for-each>
<xsl:text> </xsl:text>
<xsl:apply-templates select="name"/>
</xsl:element>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
You can use the following stylesheet to get rid of duplicate name entries.
It should work with any standards compliant XSLT processor, but I verified it only on Apache's Xalan.
Hope this helps . . .
Shashank

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" version="1.0">
<xsl:template match="index[not(./@name = preceding::index/@name)]">
<xsl:value-of select="@name"/>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
[ February 28, 2002: Message edited by: Shashank M Tanksali ]
Most new editions normally tend to have atleast 70 percent of the same content as the old edition. However I do think that it is much better to use the second edition for 141 preparation primarily because it covers the actual stuff needed for the exam and IBM recommends it.
I have not compared both the editions completely, but I did find quite a few differences. For example,the second edition covers SAX2 instead of SAX1, has a separate chapter on XPath, UDDI and WSDL (last chapter), ebusiness integration etc.
However to answer your question as to whether the first edition is good enough to start preparation for 141, I think the answer is yes.
Also there is an enormous amount of material on the web about XML, which should really help for 141 preparation. Also there is atleast one guy, who has posted on this board, who did not even read Professional XML and passed 141.
However I think, most people would rather read a single book completely than read bits and pieces from all over the place, since the concepts flow smoothly, if you read a single book.
Maybe others can shed more light on the differences between the two editions.
Just my two cents ...
Shashank
I don't think what you have is Professional XML Second edition. What you have looks like the first edition.
The Professional XML, which is referred to on the board is Professional XML Second edition ISBN 1-86100-5059 from Wrox press.
There are quite a few changes between the first and second editions.
Besides the second edition is published in May 2001.
Shashank
[ February 25, 2002: Message edited by: Shashank M Tanksali ]
Congratulations Nitin !!!
How long did it take you to prepare for the exam ?
-Shashank
Congratulations Niharika !!!
Could you please enlighten us to the following ?
1> How close does the sample test come to the real thing ? I read on yahoo groups that it is not too close to the real test.
2> Do we need to know the interfaces etc of DOM and SAX completely ?
3> What references did you use for XML signature, security etc ?
4> How long did it take for you to prepare for the exam ?
Congratulations once again.
Shashank
Sun Certified Java Developer for Java2
Oops, thanks for pointing that out.
I have re registered according to the official naming policy.