RE: XSL as a better XPointer was RE: The Cathedral and the Bizarre (was: do you use pi's?)

Subject: RE: XSL as a better XPointer was RE: The Cathedral and the Bizarre (was: do you use pi's?)
From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 15:10:40 -0400
Hi Jonathan,

Your sample just reminded me that the XSL name space is more intuitive than
XPointers. Also that we need Occam because it seems we are multiplying the
entities as finitum. Occam where are you, we need your razor.:-))

Regards
Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netfolder.com

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jonathan Borden
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 1999 10:49 AM
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: XSL as a better XPointer was RE: The Cathedral and the Bizarre
(was: do you use pi's?)



>
> That is correct. More correctly, it locates the element that contains
> verse 12. If I were to locate the entire quote I'd have to write
>
> nt.xml#root().descendant(21,chapter).span(child(12,v),child(13,v))
>
> | Sorry, XPointer examples are rarer than hens teeth, need to seize on
> | every one I can get.
>

	Or in XSL patterns:

	//chapter[21]/v[12]


	XSL patterns are a better XPointer (less weight more filling...)

Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread