Re: Multi-target pattern issues

Paul Grosso wrote:
 
> It's not exactly "multiple target-element siblings"; rather, the
> submission allowed for multiple patterns in a single construction
> rule.  And, yes, multiple patterns are or-ed (just as if they were
> really individual rules which all have the same right hand side).
> 
> If you reconsider your thoughts in light of multiple patterns where
> each pattern has to follow those shown in the submission, you'll
> probably realize that many of your examples are not allowed.  However,
> the XSL WG plans to have a draft ready for July that will have a
> different syntax for patterns.
> 

Thanks. This wasn't terribly clear from the spec., but is does explain
the basis for what is and is not acceptable pattern syntax.

Based on what you are saying, my original example 2 is valid syntax
right?

David Kellum wrote:

>(Example 2)
>
>       <element type="A">
>               <target-element type="B"/>
>               <element type="C"/>
>       </element>

Also: Might it be possible for this mailing list to get an idea of what
is on the table for a new pattern syntax?  Or at least the design
critaria or what advantages it has over the old?


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