Subject: Re: Matching Attributes with @ From: lachance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Francois Lachance) Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 08:20:29 -0400 (EDT) |
> > On Fri, 26 May 2000, Kay Michael wrote: > > > And if that seems absurd, just substitute some non-biological words like > > "controller" and "component" for "parent" and "child", and it doesn't seem > > so bad. > > I must be getting punchy. Would I be pardoned for punning that, in > effect, all attributes are bastards, then? > > Offered as a laugh and as thanks to everyone who's helped so much. > > :-() > > jr Pardon granted...:) but conclusion of illegitemacy not ... <soma type="element"> <nodetype type="attribute"> <metaphor>bastard <remark>contains traces of the legal notion of child</remark> </metaphor> <metaphor>test tube baby <remark>still contains traces of the biological notion of child</remark> </metaphor> <metaphor>test tube culture <remark>interesting how a petri dish can stand in loco parentis</remark> <remark>few would ascribe child status to the contents of petri dishes</remark> </metaphor> </nodetype> <nodetype type="text"> <metaphor>child</metaphor> </nodetype> </soma> -- Francois Lachance XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Matching Attributes with @, John Robert Gardner | Thread | RE: Matching Attributes with @, paulo . gaspar |
RE: XSL template match question, Brian Mulder | Date | RE: making calculations in XSL, .::romina::tulisi::. |
Month |