RE: Abbreviated Syntax

> 
>   Are there any advantages with  unabbreviated syntax ?

It's sometimes clearer, for example I sometimes use x[child::y] for
emphasis. I would expect most processors would handle the two syntaxes
identically - it's just possible that a processor might use some
optimization for "//a" that it doesn't use for
"/descendant-or-self::node()/a", but it's unlikely.

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


>   e.g. When transforming, does it process faster? Is it more 
> standards compliant?
> 
>   Below is an example of unabbreviated syntax
> 
>   Abbreviated syntax: <xsl:value-of select="@number"/>
> 
>   Unabbreviated syntax:  <xsl:value-of select="attribute::number"/>
>   
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
>  Arthur                          mailto:ArthurMaloney@xxxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 
> 


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