[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Should "//ename[n]" mean "/descendant::ename"?

Subject: Should "//ename[n]" mean "/descendant::ename"?
From: Mulberry Technologies List Owner<xsl-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:48:01 -0500
 Should "//ename[n]" mean "/descendant::ename"?
>Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:27:19 -0500
>To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From: Jonathan Robie <jwrobie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Should "//ename[n]" mean "/descendant::ename"?


>I am playing around with some ideas that I would like some feedback on.
>Suppose XQuery and XPath 2.0 changed the meaning of "//" as follows:
>
>//ename[n]
>=> /descendant::ename[n]
>
>//@aname[n]
>=> /descendant::*/attribute::aname[n]
>
>With this definition, "appendix//para[1]" would mean "the first paragraph
>in the appendix", rather than "the first paragraph in any element in the
>appendix". With the XPath 1.0 definition, you have to write
>"(appendix//para)[1]" to find the first paragraph in the appendix, and I
>find that I quite generally use parentheses any time that I combine "//"
>with subscripts.
>
>When asking what purpose the current definition serves, I have been told
>that "in the context of XSLT patterns, people use appendix//para[1] to
>format the first paragraph of every section within an appendix." This is
>the one usage I can think of where there would be compatibility issues. But
>this particular pattern does not really work - it applies not only to the
>first paragraph of every section, but also to the first paragraph of any
>table, editorial note, list...
>
>If you want it to apply to the first paragraph of every section, I think
>you should write:
>
>     appendix//section/para[1]
>
>I just looked through xmlspec.xsl and several other stylesheets, and could
>not find an instance where someone leverages // and [n] in the way outlined
>above. In my XQuery examples, on the other hand, virtually every query that
>uses // together with [n] requires parentheses in order to give the
>intended result. Also, some people have suggested that static typing is
>easier with the proposed definitions.
>
>So here are some questions:
>
>1. Is the proposed definition more intuitive?
>2. How many stylesheets would break under this definition?
>
>I am very interested in the feelings of the XSL community on these questions.
>
>Jonathan



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.