Subject: RE: [xsl] Better include them in the XSLT 2.0 spec (Was: Re: [xsl] Time for an exslt for 2.0?) From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 09:25:37 +0100 |
> To be pedantic, my:f($x) is my:f($x) should always evaluate to true() > in the absence of errors. But that can be taken as read. No, given <xsl:function name="f"> <xsl:param name="x"/> <a/> </xsl:function> then f($x) is f($x) is defined to be false. Similarly, given <xsl:variable name="x" as="element()*"> <xsl:for-each select="1 to 5"><a/></xsl:for-each> </xsl:variable> then count($x/.) is defined to be 5. (The /. causes duplicates to be eliminated: this is to demonstrate that in this case there are no duplicates). Certain expressions - including function calls - return distinct results each time they are evaluated. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Better include them in th, Colin Paul Adams | Thread | [xsl] test for grandparent, Cas Tuyn |
Re: [xsl] How to select a node with, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] Using <xsl:for-each> and , David Carlisle |
Month |