RE: why is "(chapter//footnote)" illegal?
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Michael Kay wrote: > > boning up on my predicates and patterns, i'm reading > > kay, p. 443, which states: > > > > "(chapter//footnote) is not a valid pattern. (Why not? > > No good reason, it's just that the spec doesn't allow it." > > > > but on p. 408, there is an explanation of the (apparently > > acceptable) path expression "(chapter/para)". > > > > so is it just the difference between using the child axis > > and the descendant-or-self axis? it's not obvious to me > > why the first should be illegal while the second is legal. > > The syntax for patterns is a small subset of the syntax for XPath > expressions, and the subset doesn't allow parentheses. > > The subset was chosen to make it easy for implementations to test > whether a node matches a pattern without going through the full > algorithm of evaluating the expression for every ancestor of the node > being tested. i realize by now why i was just being dense. ever have one of those days when you just want to take back your last few posts? argh. i have *got* to stop drinking decaf. rday 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