Subject: Re: [xsl] not(not() and not()) From: Brian Grainger <granam@xxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 23:15:06 -0700 |
The first gives the correct result, but the second paints borders only on all but the last rowgroup. Shouldn't "... and ..." always be the same as "not(not(...) and not(...))"? If not, is it a better way to write the above?
not(not(...)) is two nested levels of not not(...) is only one nested level of not
Regards, Brian
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] not(not() and not()), Gustaf Liljegren | Thread | Re: [xsl] not(not() and not()), Roger Glover |
[xsl] not(not() and not()), Gustaf Liljegren | Date | Re: [xsl] not(not() and not()), Roger Glover |
Month |