Subject: Re: [xsl] Where in the XPath 2.0 is the text stating that a function can be used as the location step? From: Hermann Stamm-Wilbrandt <STAMMW@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:28:23 +0200 |
> Yes, and even here they talk about "filter expression" and the word > "function" or "function call" is never mentioned. Seems not so difficult to see in XPath 2.0 spec that a function call is allowed as StepExpr ... [27] StepExpr ::= FilterExpr | AxisStep [38] FilterExpr ::= PrimaryExpr PredicateList [41] PrimaryExpr ::= Literal | VarRef | ParenthesizedExpr | ContextItemExpr | FunctionCall Mit besten Gruessen / Best wishes, Hermann Stamm-Wilbrandt Developer, XML Compiler, L3 WebSphere DataPower SOA Appliances ---------------------------------------------------------------------- IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter Geschaeftsfuehrung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Boeblingen Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: 07/29/2010 03:57 PM Subject: Re: [xsl] Where in the XPath 2.0 is the text stating that a function can be used as the location step? >> Even a single example in the spec. would also be of great help and a >> step forward. >> >> > > I found a single example: the last example in 3.3.2. Yes, and even here they talk about "filter expression" and the word "function" or "function call" is never mentioned. -- Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev --------------------------------------- Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence. --------------------------------------- To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk ------------------------------------- Never fight an inanimate object ------------------------------------- You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what you're doing is work or play On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> While the specification should not be a tutorial, groundbreaking >> changes and the most powerful new features should be at least >> summarized in a special section of the document > > In general I agree. I think the reason this wasn't done for XPath 2.0 (apart > from the fact that no-one volunteered to do it!) is that the changes from > XPath 1.0 to 2.0 are so extensive. > >> Even a single example in the spec. would also be of great help and a >> step forward. >> >> > > I found a single example: the last example in 3.3.2. > > Michael Kay > Saxonica
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Where in the XPath 2.0 is, Dimitre Novatchev | Thread | Re: [xsl] Where in the XPath 2.0 is, Dimitre Novatchev |
Re: [xsl] Where in the XPath 2.0 is, Dimitre Novatchev | Date | Re: [xsl] Where in the XPath 2.0 is, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |