Subject: Re: select-distinct in for-each ? From: Edd Dumbill <edd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1999 13:10:22 +0000 |
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 06:39:27PM +0100, Kay Michael wrote: > > Actually the improvement I'd _really_ like to see in the area > > of sorting is getting the sorted tree back to run templates over again. > > I think you said you had an extension function to coerce result tree > > fragments back to node lists didn't you? > > > Yes, coming in the next version. I haven't done much playing with it but > there's lots of potential. There certainly is. I've tried asking on this list about this issue twice now but to little avail. Is it likely to be looked upon as a Bad Thing? I guess it raises the spectre of XSLT sheets not only describing the transformation but also the generation of the source data. > Mike Thanks Edd -- Edd Dumbill ------/ a new media consultant, writer & technologist /-- | Publishing Editor, xmlhack.com <http://xmlhack.com> | Director, Useful Information Company <http://usefulinc.com> : Internet Director, Pharmalicensing <http://pharmalicensing.com> : UK voice/msg: +44 702-093-6870 UK fax: +44 870-164-0230 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
convert-date: suggestion and implem, Clark C. Evans | Thread | RE: first-of-type, Kay Michael |
Re: Announcement: Deepcanyon.com, John Markor | Date | Re: saxon: group-by extension, James Clark |
Month |