Subject: RE: [xsl] generalized unique element From: "Laura Jenkins" <xsl_list@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:40:04 +0000 |
From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Reply-To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: [xsl] generalized unique element Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 17:09:07 +0100
> Mike> It all gets easier in XPath 2.0, where you can write > Mike> > Mike> <xsl:if test="every $x in preceding-sibling::* > Mike> satisfies name($x) != name(.)"> > > Are you _sure_ that's easier than > > <xsl:if test="preceding-sibling::*[name(.)=name(current())]"> >
Well, I can't say it's a simpler solution; but in my case, this afternoon, it was a solution that I found more easily.
Michael Kay
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
_________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Re: [xsl] generalized unique el, scruss | Thread | [xsl] doe alternative?, DPawson |
[xsl] xalan-java xslt node value, Jason S | Date | Re: [xsl] Avoid outputting newlines, Alex Polite |
Month |