I am reading in an XML file and writing out a fixed text file output.

After some invesigating, here is how I am going about this.

Please let me know if there is a better way.

I am writing out each field one at a time for the length specified for that field. The field will either get truncated or padded with spaces for it to equal the length specified. I am building each record that way for the specified fixed length.

For Ex.

<xsl:variable name="pad3" select="' '"/>
<xsl:variable name="pad9" select="' '"/>
<xsl:variable name="pad10" select="' '"/>
.
.
<xsl:variable name="newline">
<xsl:text>
</xsl:text>
</xsl:variable>
.
.
.
<xsl:template name="HDR">

<xsl:if test="./XML_FIeld1"><xsl:value-of select='substring(./XML_Field1, 1, 10)'/></xsl:if>
<xsl:value-of select="substring($pad10,(string-length(XML_Field1)+1))"/>

<xsl:if test="./XML_FIeld2"><xsl:value-of select='substring(./XML_Field2, 1, 3)'/></xsl:if>
<xsl:value-of select="substring($pad3,(string-length(XML_Field2)+1))"/>
.
.
.
<!-- Fill out remaining record with spaces -->
<xsl:value-of select="$pad9"/>

<xsl:value-of select="$newline"/>
<!-- line break in output file -->

</xsl:template>

In addition to asking if there is a better way, I would like to know how the new line works in XSLT. I usually get them after that newline command I put in (which I don't fully understand, lol) but sometimes I also get them after each field.

It looks like things change when you add text directly (not from the input XML) I still looking for a patterns, but since I found this site and it has been helpful, I thought I'd ask what the rules are for new line feeds.

Thanks!
RR

A simpler way of doing padding to a fixed length N is to do (substring(concat($X, $PAD), 1, $N) where $PAD is a string of N or more spaces.

__________________
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
Author, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Programmer\'s Reference

Thanks! that's a good one.

It looks like if you end a line with a hard coded value, you get a new line, but if you put something after the hard coded value, or wite a variable that has a value assigned to it, you do not get a new line.

<!--This way does a carriage return after the hard coded "A" -->
<xsl:value-of select="myJavaScript:GetCurrentDateTime()"/>A
<xsl:value-of select="$pad30"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad30"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad9"/>

<!--This way does not do a carriage return -->
<xsl:value-of select="myJavaScript:GetCurrentDateTime()"/>A<xsl:value-of select="$pad30"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad30"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad9"/>

<!--This way also does not do a carriage return -->
<xsl:variable name="FileType" select="'A'"/>

<xsl:value-of select="myJavaScript:GetCurrentDateTime()"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$FileType"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad30"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad30"/>
<xsl:value-of select="$pad9"/>

Still playing around with things.
Thanks again!
RR

Generally speaking there are two types of whitespace - significant and insignificant.

Whitespace between XSLT instructions is considered insignificant. e.g.:

The above contains three nodes, two <xsl:value-of> elements and a text node between them containing only whitespace (spaces, tabs and carriage returns).

Whitespace included within a text node, or within an XSLT <xsl:text> instruction is considered significant.

The text node above contains three nodes again, two <xsl:value-of> elements and a text node. In this instance the text node now contains non-whitespace content, i.e. "A" + carriage return. Therefore the whitespace is considered significant.

For a better understanding of whitespace I can really recommend you get a hold of Michael Kay's XSLT 2.0 reference - it covers all of this very well.

__________________
/- Sam Judson : Wrox Technical Editor -/

Think before you post: What have you tried?

Ok, thanks, that helps to clear things up. I think I understand it now, but will investigate the book further if gets confusing again.

I think you meant to say insignificant in the first example and not significant . I hope so at least, becuase it makes sense to me that way, ha ha.

Thanks again!
RR