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 |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
XSL as a better XPointer was RE: Th, Jonathan Borden | Thread | Re: XSL as a better XPointer was RE, Chris Lilley |
Re: Xlink, Duane Nickull | Date | Suppressing source tree content, John E. Simpson |
Month |