Subject: Re: [xsl] Equal rights for xsl:next-match & co From: Evan Lenz <evan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 11:32:19 -0700 |
To me, it doesn't make sense to say "next match on the current node." (What does that even mean?) No, it's simply the next match; the only match we could be talking about is the match that occurred: the node that matched and triggered the rule represented by the xsl:template ancestor. That it happens to have always been coincident with the current node is a consequence of the arbitrary restriction imposed by XSLT 2.0. That's the way I look at it. :-) Evan On May 21, 2013, at 9:25 AM, David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 21/05/2013 17:12, Evan Lenz wrote: >> <xsl:for-each select="1 to 10"> >> <xsl:next-match/> >> </xsl:for-each> > > well yes matching on the original node would be reasonably intuitive if the for-each is iterating over atomic items, but I think it would be pretty odd to do that if it was iterating over nodes, and the sequence might be a mix of both and you can't statically tell which is which so > not allowing it seems a safe first step:-) > > David > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England > and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: > Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom. > > This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is > powered by MessageLabs. ________________________________________________________________________
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Equal rights for xsl:next, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Equal rights for xsl:next, Wendell Piez |
Re: [xsl] Equal rights for xsl:next, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] deep copy without attribu, Ihe Onwuka |
Month |