Subject: RE: [xsl] Strict sequential identity rule? From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 14:58:19 +0100 |
OK, Dimitre, I give up. I know you've got a rabbit up your sleeve, and I can't ferret it out. I was thinking the catch might be that a node produced by copying can never be "identical" to the original, but I can't imagine that's what you had in mind. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Dimitre Novatchev [mailto:dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: 21 September 2005 13:48 > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [xsl] Strict sequential identity rule? > > Hi, > I think that trying to answer the following question can be > interesting and > useful for the members of our community. > > Is the following statement true or false: > > "The transformation below is an identity transformation": > > <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" > xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"> > <xsl:output omit-xml-declaration="yes"/> > <xsl:template match="@* | node()"> > <xsl:copy> > <xsl:apply-templates select="@*"/> > <xsl:apply-templates select="node()[1]"/> > </xsl:copy> > <xsl:apply-templates > select="following-sibling::node()[1]"/> > </xsl:template> > </xsl:stylesheet> > > > -- > Cheers, > Dimitre Novatchev > --------------------------------------- > Getting caught is the mother of invention.
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Strict sequential identit, Joris Gillis | Thread | Re: [xsl] Strict sequential identit, andrew welch |
[xsl] Variable construction, Aaron Johnson | Date | [xsl] Variable construction: Aftert, Aaron Johnson |
Month |