Subject: RE: [xsl] in search for more elegant XPaths From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:47:38 +0100 |
> *[string-length(normalize-space(.))>0] > No need to work out the length (which can be surprisingly > costly for general unicode strings) you can just do > > *[normalize-space(.)] > > as the predicate is true if teh string is non empty. > (Although I have a feeling saxon for example does that > rewrite for you anyway, so it may make no difference.) Indeed. Saxon will neither construct a string with the whitespace removed, nor count the characters that remain after removing them: with either expression it simply scans the string (or rather, its UTF16 representation) and returns false as soon as it hits a non-whitespace codepoint. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
AW: [xsl] in search for more elegan, Huditsch, Roman \(LN | Thread | Re: [xsl] in search for more elegan, David Carlisle |
AW: [xsl] in search for more elegan, Huditsch, Roman \(LN | Date | Re: [xsl] in search for more elegan, David Carlisle |
Month |