Subject: Re: [xsl] more elegant way of doing this? (very simple) From: Steve <subsume@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:56:40 -0400 |
unless you really need to always use a node test AContribution rather than name()='AContribution' It's namespace aware and likely more efficient.
Are you using xsl 1 or 2?
xpath 1:
sum(Records/Record/*[self::AContribution|self::BContribution|self::CContribution][number()=number()])
xpath2 you can do the same, or a bit more simply:
sum(Records/Record/(AContribution|BContribution|CContribution)[number()=number()])
David
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] more elegant way of doing, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] more elegant way of doing, G. Ken Holman |
Re: [xsl] Need help with XSLT: addi, Nishi Bhonsle | Date | Re: [xsl] Dividing a long document , Choi Ryan |
Month |