Subject: Re: [xsl] generalized unique element From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 14:40:19 +0100 |
tried doing something like.. <xsl:if test="not(name(.) = preceding::node()/name())"> the / operator has to have path expressions not functions that return a string, like name(). You want the second name() to be like te first, taking the node as argument. name(preceding::node()) unfortunately you then can't use the magic property of = to test all elements of a node set, so you then need to use a predicate,something like <xsl:variable name="n" select="name(.)"/> <xsl:if test="preceding::*[name(.)=$n]"> You mentioned though the "Meunchian method" which does the same using keys which will be quicker on large data sets 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] generalized unique elemen, Laura Jenkins | Thread | RE: [xsl] generalized unique elemen, Michael Kay |
RE: [xsl] document() function: erro, Dave Grewcock | Date | Re: [xsl] doe alternative?, David Carlisle |
Month |