Subject: Re: [xsl] Keys with duplicates should be simple From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 07:22:39 +0000 |
No [2] means that a 2nd one exists which would be true if a 3rd one existed etc. The full dataset picks up instances where there is more than one duplicate so I can verify the above interpretation. Having said that your offering although more verbose is superior semantically as really the best way to write this is something like (and I am pleading the fifth on the syntax here) exists(key('person',@href)[2]) but then you look at that and you realise or can argue (I think) that what I wrote is an abbreviated form of that anyway. I suppose a guru could tell whether they are semantically identical and whether the one abbreviates the other. On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Graydon <graydon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 04:38:49PM -0800, Dimitre Novatchev scripsit: >> <xsl:key name="person" match="a" use="@href"/> >> <xsl:template match="person"> >> <duplicate> >> <xsl:copy-of select="a[key('person',@href)[2]]"/> >> </duplicate> >> </xsl:template> >> </xsl:stylesheet> > > Can I note that the [2] would appear to suppose that there's only ever > one duplicate? > > not(position() eq 1) is likely safer. > > -- Graydon
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Keys with duplicates shou, Graydon | Thread | Re: [xsl] Keys with duplicates shou, Wendell Piez |
[xsl] Re: [saxon] template match de, Ihe Onwuka | Date | [xsl] Context node versus current s, Costello, Roger L. |
Month |