Re: would like to simplify my XSLT

Play the video

Subject: Re: would like to simplify my XSLT
From: Abel Braaksma <abel.online@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:43:38 +0100

David Carlisle wrote:

no even if the attribute had the same name, it would be a different node with different identity.

Ah, thanks for correcting me. I did a test that I thought proofed my right. However, I made the wrong assumptions for the test resulting in wrong results resulting in wrong conclusions....

Which, makes me wonder in what scenario's 'intersect' can be useful. It appears to me that normal grouping is more flexible.

= allows you do do value-based intersection (of strings for example) if $s1 and $s2 are sequences of strings then $s1[.=$s2] is the sequence of strings that are common to $s1 and $s2.

Yes. And that is basically what many of us showed in response to the OP. But don't you find '$1 intersect $2' much more readable than '$1[.=$2]'? (if automatic node-to-value were applied for intersect). Undoubtedly there are subtle reasons that the designers of XPath 2 have foreseen while disallowing union, intersect and except to operate on any type of sequences, incl. atomic types (even though there are other operators that yield the same result).

-- Abel

Current Thread

Re: would like to simplify my XSLT, (continued)
- George Cristian Bina - 29 Jan 2007 14:25:22 -0000

<- Previous	Index	Next ->
Re: would like to simplify my, David Carlisle	Thread	RE: would like to simplify my, Michael Kay
Dynamic, configurable transfo, Yves Forkl	Date	RE: many-to-many, Brown, William S
	Month

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

RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3


	Stylus Studio® Developer Network \| Contact Us \| Email this page