|
[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: ancestor question
At 04:03 PM 10/1/01, Francis wrote:
Wendell Piez wrote: > > The trick is, that the value of a node-set is the string value of the > *first* node in the node-set (in document order). > I'm feeling picky picky picky today... just in case anyone reads the above sentence out of its original context (now, how could that happen?) Oh, maybe if someone quoted you ... :-> may I point out that while it is true for xsl:value-of, it is not always true - exceptions (ranging from the obvious to the less obvious) include xsl:apply-templates, xsl:variable and document() Good point. I should have been clearer. I meant "value" in the sense of "string-value", as used in the XPath spec. (http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#dt-string-value, http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#function-string etc.) Those other things return node-sets (the document() function), assign values (of any datatype) to variables, copy to the result tree, create fragments etc. and in many cases there are "values" floating around. I guess it's so handy always to be able to know what the string-value is, that I just think of "values" meaning ways of getting access to the data in the source tree ... comes out as strings. Misleading, I guess. (On the other hand, you could say the value of something is what you get when you ask for ...say... value-of...) I'll try to say "string-value" from now on. Cheers, Wendell
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|

Cart








