Subject: [xsl] Should "//ename[n]" mean "/descendant::ename"? From: Mulberry Technologies List Owner <xsl-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:48:01 -0500 |
>Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:27:19 -0500 >To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >From: Jonathan Robie <jwrobie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >Subject: Should "//ename[n]" mean "/descendant::ename"? >I am playing around with some ideas that I would like some feedback on. >Suppose XQuery and XPath 2.0 changed the meaning of "//" as follows: > >//ename[n] >=> /descendant::ename[n] > >//@aname[n] >=> /descendant::*/attribute::aname[n] > >With this definition, "appendix//para[1]" would mean "the first paragraph >in the appendix", rather than "the first paragraph in any element in the >appendix". With the XPath 1.0 definition, you have to write >"(appendix//para)[1]" to find the first paragraph in the appendix, and I >find that I quite generally use parentheses any time that I combine "//" >with subscripts. > >When asking what purpose the current definition serves, I have been told >that "in the context of XSLT patterns, people use appendix//para[1] to >format the first paragraph of every section within an appendix." This is >the one usage I can think of where there would be compatibility issues. But >this particular pattern does not really work - it applies not only to the >first paragraph of every section, but also to the first paragraph of any >table, editorial note, list... > >If you want it to apply to the first paragraph of every section, I think >you should write: > > appendix//section/para[1] > >I just looked through xmlspec.xsl and several other stylesheets, and could >not find an instance where someone leverages // and [n] in the way outlined >above. In my XQuery examples, on the other hand, virtually every query that >uses // together with [n] requires parentheses in order to give the >intended result. Also, some people have suggested that static typing is >easier with the proposed definitions. > >So here are some questions: > >1. Is the proposed definition more intuitive? >2. How many stylesheets would break under this definition? > >I am very interested in the feelings of the XSL community on these questions. > >Jonathan XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] RTF and XSLT, Christopher R. Gardn | Thread | Re: [xsl] Should "//ename[n]" mean , Wendell Piez |
[xsl] Problems with resolving URIs , Ahmed Sako | Date | Re: [xsl] applying templates to an , Wendell Piez |
Month |