Subject: Re: [xsl] Universally quantified test of child attribute presence/absence From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:17:09 GMT |
> Thank you very much for this hint - I actually need a test that returns > true if all children carry the attribute AND if there are element > children at all - maybe David's suggestion might help? (See below.) there are always many ways of phrasing these things. It's best just to say them in english (or German or any other language of choice) in a way that makes most sense to you, and then write the xpath the same way. It's possible that some xpath variants are more efficient than others, but it's also possible that the difference isn't measurable, or that the compiler re-writes the expressions to the same internal form whatever you do, so I wouldn't worry too much about which form you use. for example to write the xpath to match the english above you could write (every $c in * satisfies $c[@attribute]) and * although a more compact way to say that in english is to say no child exists which does not have the attribute, or in xpath not(*[not(@attribute)]) David
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Universally quantified te, Yves Forkl | Thread | Re: [xsl] Universally quantified te, Yves Forkl |
Re: [xsl] Universally quantified te, Yves Forkl | Date | Re: [xsl] Universally quantified te, Abel Braaksma |
Month |