Subject: Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0 From: Dave Pawson <davep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:42:20 +0100 |
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:25:48 +0100 David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > <xsl;template > select="skillarea[tokenize(@targets,'|')=tokenize($param,'|')]"/> > > if you're worried about repeatedly tokenizing the attributes probably > you can optimise this with a key or some such, or perhaps saxon will > optimise for you behind the scenes or perhaps it's fast enough anyway. No problem with speed. <grin/> Guess you mean <xsl:template match="skillarea[tokenize(@targets,'|')=tokenize($param,'|')]"/> This is the 'odd' meaning of = in xslt 2? If any item on LHS is present in RHS then = returns true. Issue: What happens with tokenize when the separator is missing? empty set? Resolve using if contains(@target,'|') then tokenize.... else ... Getting rather messy since either could be a list. I think this idea would work without a separator? param = "term1 term 2" @target="term1 oddone" Would the equality work then? Currently strings, is this a case where a sequence is needed? -- regards -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Martin Honnen |
Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Andrew Welch | Date | Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Dave Pawson |
Month |