Re: [xsl] Calculating cumulative values - another call for help

[Abel Braaksma <abel.online@xxxxxxxxx>]

Andrew Welch wrote:
> On 8/30/07, Simon Shutter <simon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   
> > Sorry - I should have been more clear.  Could one use something like
> > count(ancestor::set) instead?
> >     
>
> Probably not the thing to use... but its hard to suggest what to do
> instead just from that sentence....
>
> Just changing "n" to "3" is enough to make it work with your sample
> input - if you're suggesting that set/@id isn't like it is in your
> sample and you're having problems adapting the transform to work with
> your actual input then post a more representative sample.

Just in case it is still of interest: in my solution, I walk the tree 
keeping a (kind of) hash any @x that is passed by. Meaning, it will work 
with any @x, and it does not matter whether these @x are numbers, 
strings, empty, in order or no order. It just counts the matching @x 
together.

When there are very many @x, you may want to optimize the 
distinct-values([original-list], [new-x]), because that may yield some 
extra performance penalty when it rolls into the 10000s different @x's.

In retrospective, do note that my solution will obviously be much harder 
to maintain than the concise version using sum(...) from Andrew. Though 
you can hide the complexity by putting a lot into custom user defined 
special home grown own breed xslt functions.

Cheers,
-- Abel Braaksma