Subject: Re: XT and SAXON treats //ccc and /descendant::ccc differently From: Miloslav Nic <nicmila@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 15:03:27 +0200 |
Thanks. As ususally happens in such a case while I was browsing a few minutes through the spec before I sent the question I have found it immediately when I received your answer. David Carlisle wrote: > > > By now I thought that //foo is an abbrev form of /descendant::foo > > Am I missing something or is there some shared bug ? Thanks. > > The former. > > xpath spec says > > As in location paths, // is short for > /descendant-or-self::node()/. > > > <xsl:value-of select="//ccc[5]"/> gives no hit > > <xsl:value-of select="/descendant::ccc[5]"/> gives c22 > > and one assumes > > <xsl:value-of select="/descendant-or-self::node()/ccc[5]"/> does the > same as // > > "//ccc[5]" selects ccc elements that are 5th ccc children of their > parents. > > David > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list -- ****************************************** <firstName> Miloslav </firstName> <surname> Nic </surname> <mail> nicmila@xxxxxxxxx </mail> <support> http://www.zvon.org </support> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XT and SAXON treats //ccc and /, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: XT and SAXON treats //ccc and /, Matt Sergeant |
Re: Xalan Extension, ed billings | Date | RE: ### Outputting the "full path"., Jonathan Asbell |
Month |