|
Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: xpath2 functions returning () From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:40:51 +0000 |
David,
> That wuld be a rather big change. If strings were sequences in that
> sense then ("abc")[2] would be "b".
Whereas currently it's raises an error, of course - nothing to do with
the fact that strings aren't split into characters, but rather because
predicates can only be used on steps, and general steps must return
node sequences.
So:
(1, 2, 3)[2]
is an error according to the XPath 2.0 WD, as far as I can tell.
Which strikes me as rather peculiar, personally.
Cheers,
Jeni
---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| Re: [xsl] Re: xpath2 functions retu, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Re: xpath2 functions retu, David Carlisle |
| RE: [xsl] Re: xpath2 functions retu, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] Queestion about postional, David Carlisle |
| Month |