Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments (node equality) From: Francis Norton <francis@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:08:41 +0000 |
David Carlisle wrote: > > [trying to alter the subject headings, to split the thread up a bit] > > > how about "==" for a "same-node" operator, > > complete with usual node-set comparison sematics? > > scary! > > will lead to user errors re = v == confusion (people already get > confused between "and" and "&&" even though the latter isn't mentioned > in the spec, and would be illegal XML) True - it's appealingly compact, but we all know what they say about terseness and XML. And I have to admit I do sometimes make the "=" v. "==" error in ECMAScript, so I can't deny the dangers. > Also this would require a change > to XPath. (I suppose XPath will change one day but harder than changing > XSLT as there is no equivalent of the version attribute to flag changes) > > a prefix form would be safer: same-node(a,b) although that's probably a > bad name since a and b would be node sets, even if they were "." . > I can't think of a better name off-hand - it's still testing for "same node", even within it's node-set arguments. Would it be an XPath or XSLT function? Francis. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments (node e, David Carlisle | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments (node e, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] Merging two files, Oliver Becker | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, David Carlisle |
Month |