Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendant-or-self::node()

Michael Kay wrote:

I'm not aware of and can't think of any reason why "//" is defined the way it is other than so that //@* will work. Can you think of any?
It's possible that someone thought it would be a really good idea if //p[1]
meant "every paragraph that is the first child of its parent"; but I have no
evidence for this, and if they did, then with hindsight they were probably
wrong.

LOL. Another "really good idea" was to make sure that self::* never selects attributes, and introducing the concept of "principal node type" to ensure that.

Just kidding. I think this was another unfortunate side effect, but not nearly as bad as //p[1], or as David pointed out, the confusion surrounding the != operator.

Evan

Current Thread
Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendant-or-self::node(), (continued) David Carlisle - 17 Sep 2008 09:51:37 -0000 Andrew Welch - 17 Sep 2008 10:09:09 -0000 Evan Lenz - 17 Sep 2008 15:49:06 -0000 Michael Kay - 18 Sep 2008 08:38:35 -0000 Evan Lenz - 18 Sep 2008 23:51:41 -0000 <= Wendell Piez - 17 Sep 2008 15:26:19 -0000 Message not available Evan Lenz - 17 Sep 2008 16:02:53 -0000 David Carlisle - 17 Sep 2008 16:11:53 -0000 Andrew Welch - 17 Sep 2008 17:43:56 -0000

Current Thread

Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendant-or-self::node(), (continued)

<- Previous	Index	Next ->
RE: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Michael Kay	Thread	Re: [xsl] // expanding to descendan, Wendell Piez
Re: [xsl] Fwd: text nodes, Lucas Lain	Date	[xsl] xsltproc and stringparam, cha, tom sgouros
	Month

<-prev [Thread] next->	<-prev [Date] next->
Month Index \| List Home