Subject: Re: [xsl] compare two node sets From: "Michael Kay mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 17:24:53 -0000 |
Indeed this suggests a generalization using higher-order functions: <xsl:function name="has-duplicates" as="xs:boolean"> <xsl:param name="nodes" as="node()*"/> <xsl:param name="hashCode" as="function(node()) as xs:anyAtomicType"/> <xsl:param name="equals" as="function(node(), node()) as xs:boolean"/> <xsl:variable name="groups" as="map(xs:string, node()*)" select="map:merge($nodes ! map{$hashCode(.) : .}, map{'duplicates':'combine'})"/> <xsl:sequence select="some $k in map:keys($groups) satisfies ( let $g := $groups($k) return count($g) gt 1 and some $i in $g, $j in ($g except $i) satisfies $equals($i, $j) )"/> </xsl:function> so you can supply the functions for computing signatures and determining node equality as parameters. Michael Kay Saxonica > On 21 Jan 2020, at 15:42, Piez, Wendell A. (Fed) wendell.piez@xxxxxxxx <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > Another solution not yet suggested in this thread is to avoid deep-equal() and rely on a signature function. > > So for example, > > <xsl:function name="f:signature" as="xs:string"> > <xsl:param name="who" as="node()"/> > <xsl:value-of select="string-join($who/(first, last), ' ')"/> > </xsl:function> > > > Then your list of author-directors is //author[f:signature(.)=parent::film/child::director/f:signature(.)] > > (Or the other way around.) > > Wrap the expression in the filter in not() to retrieve authors who did not direct, etc. > > One advantage of this approach is it's easy to adjust the signature logic to real-world exigencies. > > Cheers, Wendell > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wolfhart Totschnig wolfhart.totschnig@xxxxxxxxxxx <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 4:22 PM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [xsl] compare two node sets > > Thank you, David, Michael, and Liam for the prompt replies! Michael's solution seems to be the simplest to implement. I use Saxon 9 HE, so XPath 2.0 should be okay. And, indeed, quadratic performance should not be an issue. However, Saxon throws the following error: > > XPST0003: Unexpected token "every" at start of expression > > Is there a typo in the expression? I used the expression as given: > > <xsl:when test="count(//director) eq count(//author) and every $d in //director satisfies some $a in //author satisfies deep-equal($d/*, $a/*)"> > > To clarify, the context node is the <film> element. > > Wolfhart > > > On 19.01.20 17:55, Liam R. E. Quin liam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> On Sun, 2020-01-19 at 20:37 +0000, Wolfhart Totschnig >> wolfhart.totschnig@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I have an XSL/XPath problem to which I cannot find the solution. I >>> have an xml file with data about films, in the following form >>> (simplified): >>> >>> [..] >>> . By contrast, in the following example the test should return >>> <false>: >>> >>> <film> >>> <title>M</title> >>> <director> >>> <first>Fritz</first> >>> <last>Lang</last> >>> </director> >>> <author> >>> <first>Thea von</first> >>> <last>Harbou</last> >>> </author> >>> <author> >>> <first>Fritz</first> >>> <last>Lang</last> >>> </author> >>> </film> >> Why? >> >> As stated, >> <xsl:mode on-no-match="shallow-copy" /> >> >> <xsl:template match="/"> >> <xsl:apply-templates select="/films/film[ >> some $a in author satisfies >> ( >> ($a/first = director/first) >> and ($a/last = director/last) >> ) >> ]"/> >> </xsl:template> >> >> Liam
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] compare two node sets, Piez, Wendell A. (Fe | Thread | Re: [xsl] compare two node sets, Liam R. E. Quin liam |
Re: [xsl] compare two node sets, Piez, Wendell A. (Fe | Date | Re: [xsl] compare two node sets, Liam R. E. Quin liam |
Month |