Subject: Re: [xsl] Does the count() function require access to the whole subtree? From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 11:34:46 +0000 |
On 12 January 2014 11:10, Costello, Roger L. <costello@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > A couple days ago Michael Kay wrote: > > Inspection operations on an element are operations > that can be performed while positioned at the start tag. > > Inspection operations include: count(), exists(), name(). > > Absorption operations are operations that require access > to the whole subtree. > > Absorption operations include: string(), data(), xsl:value-of > > Michael, doesn't the count() function require access to the whole subtree? How would a count be conducted by sitting at the top of a subtree? Perhaps you meant to say that the count() function is an absorption operation? I wondered this too... I'm guessing you could do a look-ahead of the xml parsing the structure without any text nodes, then you have the 'metadata' without the content. Will be interesting to find out... -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Does the count() function, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: [xsl] Does the count() function, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] Does the count() function, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] Does the count() function, David Carlisle |
Month |