Re: XT and SAXON treats //ccc and /descendant::ccc differently

[Miloslav Nic <nicmila@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks.

As ususally happens in such a case while I was browsing a few minutes
through the spec before I sent the question I have found it immediately
when I received your answer.

David Carlisle wrote:
> 
> > By now I thought that //foo is an abbrev form of /descendant::foo
> > Am I missing something or  is there some shared bug ?  Thanks.
> 
> The former.
> 
> xpath spec says
> 
> As in location paths, // is short for
>      /descendant-or-self::node()/.
> 
> > <xsl:value-of select="//ccc[5]"/>   gives no hit
> > <xsl:value-of select="/descendant::ccc[5]"/> gives c22
> 
> and one assumes
> 
> <xsl:value-of select="/descendant-or-self::node()/ccc[5]"/> does the
> same as //
> 
> "//ccc[5]" selects ccc elements that are 5th ccc children of their
> parents.
> 
> David
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

-- 
******************************************
<firstName> Miloslav </firstName>    
<surname>   Nic      </surname>     

<mail>    nicmila@xxxxxxxxx    </mail>   
<support> http://www.zvon.org  </support>


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