Subject: RE: More XSL Discussion From: Matti Katajamaki <matti@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 1998 11:27:38 -0800 |
In my mind if <a><b><c> are elements of type "item" the rule below would match each of them as a target element. Matti -----Original Message----- From: Paul Prescod [SMTP:papresco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, February 26, 1998 6:47 AM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: More XSL Discussion Matti Katajamaki wrote: > > XSL already has constructs that always match, like <target-element/>. So I > don't see anything bad in pattern matching with "zero or more" and "zero or > one" constructs. target-element matches an element, not the lack of an element. Consider: <element type="list"> <element type="item" count="any"> <target-element ....> </element> </element> <list><a><b><c></list> The rule above matches the list below but there *is no target element*. Paul Prescod - http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco [Woody Allen on Hollywood in "Annie Hall"] Annie: "It's so clean down here." Woody: "That's because they don't throw their garbage away. They make it into television shows." XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: More XSL Discussion, Richard Light | Thread | Re: More XSL Discussion, Chris Maden |
Re: More XSL Discussion, Martin Bryan | Date | Re: More XSL Discussion, Chris Maden |
Month |