|
Subject: Re: [xsl] transformation does happen after copy-of? From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 13:36:39 +0100 |
> DC wrote: Mike wrote > node() on its own is short for child::node(), which is basically what I went on to say. Which seems to suggest that my message was not internally consistent... oops... David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| RE: [xsl] transformation does happe, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] transformation does happe, David Carlisle |
| [xsl] dependency difficulties, Soos Geza | Date | Re: [xsl] transformation does happe, David Carlisle |
| Month |