Re: Re: [xsl] Thought i knew this but i guess not

[russurquhart1@xxxxxxxxxxx]

I used contains because filter could have the value filter="filter1,filter10,filter2" and i thought having a @filter='filter1' would fail for the previous string. If that is not the case, i'll change it, but i thought i tried that one time and it didn't work.


Thanks,


Russ

Feb 22, 2011 10:10:32 PM, xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


>
> Finally, I note that your test for your filter is brittle. 
> @filter='filter11' will pass. (And 'filter10' will pass for two 
> reasons.) The best fix to this depends on how you are using @filter.
>

 From the description of the problem, I think he wanted 
@filter='filter1' rather than contains(@filter, 'filter1'). It's a 
common mistake, people think of a node as "containing" a value and so 
reach for the contains() function without reading the spec to see what 
it does.

Michael Kay
Saxonica