RE: testing for following siblings

> Another confusion ... I'm trying to determine when the 
> current node has no following siblings.  One expression that 
> seems to work is:
> 
>     not(following-sibling::*)
> 
> but the following expressions don't "work", and I thought they would
> 
>     following-sibling::* = ''

That will be true if there is a following-sibling and its string value
is "".

>     following-sibling::* = '/..'
> 
That will be true if there is a following sibling whose string value is
the same as the string value of a node in the node-set "/..". Since the
node-set "/.." is always empty, this will never be true.

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx
work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 


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