Re: [xsl] Counting indent level

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 2008-09-29 12:51 +1000, Nicholas Orr wrote:
> On 29/09/2008, at 11:38 AM, G. Ken Holman wrote:
> > <xsl:template match="catalog">
> >  <xsl:apply-templates select="*"/>
> > </xsl:template>
> > <xsl:template match="group">
> >  <!--report on the group-->
> >  <xsl:apply-templates select="item"/>
> > </xsl:template>
> > <xsl:template match="item">
> >  <!--report on the item-->
> > </xsl:template>
> >
> > > The reason for that is that a item node might also contain child
> > > nodes
> > > that are also called <item> nodes that I don't want.  I only want a
> > > item node that has it's immediate parent a group node.
> >
> > Every node (except the root node above the document element) has
> > only a single parent node, so I'm not sure what you mean by
> > "immediate parent".  Unless you meant to say "immediate ancestor"
> > which is the parent.
> >
> > Above you also state you want an item whose parent is catalogue and
> > not just those whose parent is group.  If I'm wrong, then you'll
> > have to change the above to the following to not process items that
> > are not a child of a group:
> >
> > <xsl:template match="catalog">
> >  <xsl:apply-templates select="*"/>
> > </xsl:template>
>
> This is the same as the above, the first three lines at least - is
> that what you meant?

Sorry ... if you wanted to skip item children of catalogue then in 
the top example it would be select="group".

> > The code I give you above will process groups and items in document
> > order.
>
> Ken, does this mean it will retain the overall order though?

Yes.

> I want
> to process them (from my original), as an export (like csv) in the
> same order so the export would mix and match items and groups :
>
> item
> group
> group
> item
> item
> etc
>
> So it's one single export with both types mixed in the original
> order.  This is why I used a single for-each with the "or" to pick up
> everything in one go.

You didn't use "or", you used "union" (yes, there's a difference ... 
sometimes the union feels like and "or" and sometimes the union feels 
like an "and" ... your for-each statement could read "items and 
groups and items that are children of groups" which feels like an 
"and" and not an "or").  It works for you because the union is 
returned in document order.  But in summary, in your code you are 
making assumptions about your data while in my code I was focused on 
the result.  I think Mike was very eloquent (as always) in explaining 
the details of this in his post, especially how the words you put 
forward lead to a particular approach.

. . . . . . . . . Ken

--
Upcoming XSLT/XSL-FO hands-on courses:      Wellington, NZ 2009-01
Training tools: Comprehensive interactive XSLT/XPath 1.0/2.0 video
G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/
Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/bc
Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal