Re: xslt 1.0 vs xslt 2.0 problem
OK. Very clear. --- On Wed, 9/3/08, Darcy Parker <darcyparker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: From: Darcy Parker <darcyparker@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: xslt 1.0 vs xslt 2.0 problem To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Date: Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 12:37 PM No it shouldn't contradict what I said. First you need to select the A nodes that have B elements with @a containing 'foo'. (Everyone provided methods that can do this.) Second, you then copy or recreate the A nodes but only copy/reproduce the B sub-nodes that have @a containing 'foo'. (I think others will agree with this, but neglected to see this as a requirement in your first message.) Darcy On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 2:19 PM, mark bordelon <markcbordelon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I did understand you mean the first node, not the first attribute. > > Comprehension check: Does this at all contradict what Darcy wrote? I don't think it does...but just making sure. > > --- On Wed, 9/3/08, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: xslt 1.0 vs xslt 2.0 problem > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Date: Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 11:17 AM > > I wrote: > >> //A[contains((B/@a), 'foo')] > > but meant: > > //A[contains((B/@a), 'foo')] > > ...but hopefully you got the idea! > > > > > -- > Andrew Welch > http://andrewjwelch.com > Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/
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