Re: [xsl] Seek an XPath 2.0 expression for checking that each object in a file system has one parent

["Dimitre Novatchev dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>   count(//*[starts-with(name(), 'F')])
> eq
>   count(distinct-values(//*[starts-with(name(), 'F')]/name()))

Just a little bit shorter:

     count(//*[starts-with(name(), 'F')])
    eq
     count(distinct-values(//*/name()[starts-with(., 'F')]))


Cheers,
Dimitre

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   count(//*[starts-with(name(), 'F')])
> eq
>   count(distinct-values(//*[starts-with(name(), 'F')]/name()))
>
>
> This is just a first try. There could be even a shorter expression.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Dimitre.
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 4:29 PM, G. Ken Holman g.ken.holman@xxxxxxxxx
> <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I see that you are dealing with only the names of the grandchildren of the
>> root.  The vollowing has three solutions, one based on the names (as you
>> have done) and two that are namespace-safe.  The latter two are equivalent,
>> but since the operators "every" and "some" didn't come to mind for you, I
>> thought I would illustrate both.
>>
>> The second two work with axes the way you were getting started.  But for the
>> first I think you can rephrase your problem to be not that all elements have
>> one parent but that there is only one of every element ... which I think is
>> equivalent given the limited amount of information regarding your objective.
>>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> . . . . . . Ken
>>
>> ~/t/ftemp $ cat roger1.xml
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <Root>
>>     <D1>
>>         <D2/>
>>         <F1/>
>>     </D1>
>>     <D2>
>>         <F2/>
>>     </D2>
>> </Root>
>> ~/t/ftemp $ cat roger2.xml
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <Root>
>>     <D1>
>>         <D2/>
>>         <F1/>
>>     </D1>
>>     <D2>
>>         <F2/>
>>         <F1/>
>>     </D2>
>> </Root>
>> ~/t/ftemp $ xslt2 roger1.xml roger.xsl
>> true
>> true
>> true
>> ~/t/ftemp $ xslt2 roger2.xml roger.xsl
>> false
>> false
>> false
>> ~/t/ftemp $ cat roger.xsl
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
>>   xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
>>   exclude-result-prefixes="xs"
>>   version="2.0">
>>
>> <xsl:output method="text"/>
>>
>> <xsl:template match="/">
>>   <xsl:value-of select="
>>     count(/Root/*/*)=count(distinct-values(/Root/*/*/name(.)))"/>
>>   <xsl:text>&#xa;</xsl:text>
>>   <xsl:value-of select="
>>     every $elem in /Root/*/* satisfies
>>           not($elem/following::*[not(*)]/node-name(.)=node-name($elem))"/>
>>   <xsl:text>&#xa;</xsl:text>
>>   <xsl:value-of select="
>>     not( some $elem in /Root/*/* satisfies
>>               $elem/following::*[not(*)]/node-name(.)=node-name($elem))"/>
>>   <xsl:text>&#xa;</xsl:text>
>> </xsl:template>
>>
>> </xsl:stylesheet>
>> ~/t/ftemp $
>>
>>
>>
>> At 2016-10-16 22:33 +0000, Costello, Roger L. costello@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Folks,
>>>
>>> I am modeling a file system. Below is a sample instance. D1 means
>>> Directory 1, F1 means File 1, etc. The instance says this: the content of
>>> directory 1 is directory 2 and file 1. The content of directory 2 is file 2.
>>> Stated another way, directory 2 and file 1 are contained in directory 1, and
>>> file 2 is contained in directory 2.
>>>
>>> <Root>
>>>     <D1>
>>>         <D2/>
>>>         <F1/>
>>>     </D1>
>>>     <D2>
>>>         <F2/>
>>>     </D2>
>>> </Root>
>>>
>>> I want an XPath 2.0 expression which returns true if each object has one
>>> parent. An "object" is a directory or a file. In the example above each
>>> object has one parent, so the XPath should return true. Below is an illegal
>>> file system because F1 has two parents: D1 and D2.
>>>
>>> <Root>
>>>     <D1>
>>>         <D2/>
>>>         <F1/>
>>>     </D1>
>>>     <D2>
>>>         <F2/>
>>>         <F1/>
>>>     </D2>
>>> </Root>
>>>
>>> The XPath should return false.
>>>
>>> This XPath is almost correct:
>>>
>>> for $i in /Root/* return for $j in $i/* return not(name($j) =
>>> $i/following-sibling::*/*/name())
>>>
>>> I say it is "almost" correct because it returns multiple Booleans, not a
>>> single Boolean result.
>>>
>>> Two Questions:
>>>
>>> 1. What is the correct XPath expression?
>>> 2. Is there a different way to model in XML a file system that would
>>> enable a simple XPath expression?
>>>
>>> /Roger
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources |
>> Streaming hands-on XSLT/XPath 2 training @US$45: http://goo.gl/Dd9qBK |
>> Crane Softwrights Ltd. _ _ _ _ _ _ http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/ |
>> G Ken Holman _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ mailto:gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
>> Google+ blog _ _ _ _ _ http://plus.google.com/+GKenHolman-Crane/posts |
>> Legal business disclaimers: _ _ http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal |
>>
>> 
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Dimitre Novatchev
> ---------------------------------------
> Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
> ---------------------------------------
> To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
> -------------------------------------
> Never fight an inanimate object
> -------------------------------------
> To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes may be the
> biggest mistake of all
> ------------------------------------
> Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.
> -------------------------------------
> You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
> you're doing is work or play
> -------------------------------------
> To achieve the impossible dream, try going to sleep.
> -------------------------------------
> Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
> -------------------------------------
> Typing monkeys will write all Shakespeare's works in 200yrs.Will they
> write all patents, too? :)
> -------------------------------------
> Sanity is madness put to good use.
> -------------------------------------
> I finally figured out the only reason to be alive is to enjoy it.



-- 
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes may be the
biggest mistake of all
------------------------------------
Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play
-------------------------------------
To achieve the impossible dream, try going to sleep.
-------------------------------------
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
-------------------------------------
Typing monkeys will write all Shakespeare's works in 200yrs.Will they
write all patents, too? :)
-------------------------------------
Sanity is madness put to good use.
-------------------------------------
I finally figured out the only reason to be alive is to enjoy it.