Hi, I've just tried your example: {code} <!ENTITY Auml "Ä"> {code} And it worked well: http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/VMA (note: this link will be reset tomorrow but just edit the page and copy the input to recreate it) Thanks -Vincent On Nov 10, 2008, at 5:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:

Hey everyone, While using XWiki version 1.1.2.5797 to document some software, the following problem occurred: I tried to insert snippets of a XSL file into a XWiki page using a {code} macro. As far as I know this macro treats input as plaintext, which would be exactly what I need. However, it turned out to work differently. It parsed HTML entities, so instead of displaying inputs like <!ENTITY Auml "&#196;"> exactly as they are, the HTML parts are parsed to <!ENTITY Auml "Ä"> Having failed with the {code} macro, I tried {pre} and \, but none of them worked. The same problem occurred when I used XWiki 1.7 which is running on a test server in the company I work for. Does anyone of you know how to make XWiki display HTML and XML entities as plaintext? I could not find anything about this problem in the documentation, the FAQ, or in the mailing list archive. Did I simply miss something? Since I read some threads about issues with the WYSIWYG editor, let me add that I use the XWiki editor, not the WYSIWYG editor. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Best regards, Sascha

On Nov 10, 2008, at 5:39 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:

Vincent Massol wrote:

...

Hi,

I've just tried your example:

{code} <!ENTITY Auml "Ä"> {code}

No, that's not the problem. He tried to enter:

{code} <!ENTITY Auml "&#196;"> {code}

which was displayed as

<!ENTITY Auml "Ä">

and not as

<!ENTITY Auml "&#196;">

Which means that we do escape < and >, but no &. Do we want that? Is it something all users want and need? I'll be -1 for changing this, since it will break non-UTF instances that need to print non-ISO-8859-1 symbols in a {code} block.

Sascha, you could double-escape, like in:

{code} &lt;!ENTITY Auml &quot;&amp;#196;&quot;&gt; {code}

I know it's more hard work, but it's a working workaround.

Another solution is to use XWiki 2.0 syntax (available since 1.7M1) which supports full escaping. See http://platform.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/XWikiSyntax Thanks -Vincent

...

And it worked well:

http://playground.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Test/VMA

(note: this link will be reset tomorrow but just edit the page and copy the input to recreate it)

Thanks -Vincent

On Nov 10, 2008, at 5:03 PM, [email protected] wrote:

...

Hey everyone, While using XWiki version 1.1.2.5797 to document some software, the following problem occurred: I tried to insert snippets of a XSL file into a XWiki page using a {code} macro. As far as I know this macro treats input as plaintext, which would be exactly what I need. However, it turned out to work differently. It parsed HTML entities, so instead of displaying inputs like <!ENTITY Auml "&#196;"> exactly as they are, the HTML parts are parsed to <!ENTITY Auml "Ä"> Having failed with the {code} macro, I tried {pre} and \, but none of them worked. The same problem occurred when I used XWiki 1.7 which is running on a test server in the company I work for. Does anyone of you know how to make XWiki display HTML and XML entities as plaintext? I could not find anything about this problem in the documentation, the FAQ, or in the mailing list archive. Did I simply miss something? Since I read some threads about issues with the WYSIWYG editor, let me add that I use the XWiki editor, not the WYSIWYG editor. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Best regards, Sascha

Hi Sascha, On Nov 12, 2008, at 9:33 PM, Sascha Berkessel wrote:

Thank you very much, Vincent and Sergiu! Sergiu, the workaround you suggested is perfect. But you were right, it was quite a bunch of work :-) One more question came up: Shall I share this piece of information as a FAQ on xwiki.org? I'm not sure, because the XWiki 2.0 Syntax offers a more efficient workaround for versions 1.7 and up. Hence, the workaround for older versions might be outdated. What do you think?

Glad it worked for you. You could add it as a FAQ entry indeed and mention that it's for XWiki Syntax 1.0. Thanks! -Vincent