Subject: RE: [xsl] Empty nodes From: DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 08:38:42 +0100 |
Mike and others explained this fully, see http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/sect2/N3328.html#d122e60 Regards DaveP > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Kay [mailto:mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 04 July 2001 14:33 > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [xsl] Empty nodes > > > > You make me confuse ... :) > > Do you mind to give us some examples of > > 1. "has no child nodes" > > 2. "has zero-length string value" > > 3. "has no child elements or text nodes" > > <a/> satisfies 1,2, and 3 > <a><b/></a> satisfies 2 > <a><!--comment--></a> satisfies 2 and 3. > > Attributes, on these definitions, make no difference. But of > course you are > perfectly entitled to define "empty" as meaning "has no > attributes", if > that's what you want to test for. > > PS, please tell your legal department to stop adding this > junk to your mail. > I haven't read it, and I hereby give notice that I regard it > as having no > legal effect. And the same applies to everyone else. > > Mike Kay > > > 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 -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Empty nodes, Benoit_Aumars | Thread | RE: [xsl] New to XML - probably not, Rene de Vries |
Re: [xsl] node-set, Francis Norton | Date | RE: [xsl] Re: XPath riddle, Nikolaos Giannadakis |
Month |