Subject: Re: XPath optional node question From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 22:40:34 GMT |
me> bar[ancestor::foo and ancester::*[self::foo or descendent::foo or me> self::a or self::b]] as previously mentioned that fails if there are extra foo in the tree, but I think bar[ancestor::*[not(self::a) or not(self::b)][1][self::foo]] meets the spec: the first ancestor that isn't a or b is foo. or, going the other way: foo[descendent::*[not(self::a) or not(self::b)][1][self::bar]] foo such that the first descendent that isn't a or b is bar. David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XPath optional node question, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: XPath optional node question, Dimitre Novatchev |
Re: Transformation from XML to Tabl, Estefan27 | Date | Re: ANN: New Release of Unicorn XSL, Alexey Gokhberg |
Month |