Subject: Re: [xsl] the nearest ancestor with the attribute From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 13:50:42 GMT |
> A node set is always unordered until you do anything with it like > iterate over it, get a value from it or whatever. Of course a node set > is pretty useless unless you do something with it, so saying a node > set is unordered doesn't particularly help :) It mainly helps in defining | as set union, which is a standard operation on sets. If you wanted to define | on ordered lists you'd have to describe removing of duplicates and say which duplicate was removed, etc. > When you use a predicate on a node set that's already been generated, ... > When you use a predicate on a node set within a step ... Note that these are two entirely different bits of the XPath grammar, that just happen to both use the same [ ... ] syntax. MK says (page 358 of his book) The operation of a Predicate in a FilterExpr is very similar to the application of a Predicate in a Step in a LocationPath .... you can often use Predicates without being fully aware that you are using a FilterExpr or a LocationPath. .... The main differences to watch out for are .... David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] the nearest ancestor with, Jeni Tennison | Thread | Re: [xsl] the nearest ancestor with, G. Ken Holman |
RE: [xsl] copy all attributes but o, Morris, Chris | Date | Re: [xsl] copy all attributes but o, David Carlisle |
Month |