Subject: Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendant-or-self::node() From: Evan Lenz <evan@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 16:52:09 -0700 |
Why does // expand to descendant-or-self::node() rather than to descendant::x where x is the next item in the path?
I've always imagined it was primarily to make //@x work; though I'm not at all convinced it was a smart decision. Certainly in practice it's very rare to see any axis other than "child" after "//" (for example //.., or //following-sibling::x is never seen in practice and never required; and //@x is something one could live without).
I think making "//" expand to "/descendant::" might well have been a better design.
Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] re: SPAM-HIGH: [xsl] // expa, Vladimir Nesterovsky |
Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Evan Lenz | Date | Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Evan Lenz |
Month |