RE: Matching Attributes with @

Confusion upon confusion!

> On Fri, 26 May 2000, Paulo Gaspar wrote:
> > > 
> > Each element node can have 2 basic types of descendent nodes:
> >  - Content;
> >  - Attributes.

Paulo wrote wrong. Attributes are not descendents of the element they belong
to, in the technical sense of the word.
> 
> I remember a comment some time ago on this . . . that attributes are
> descendents . . . wouldn't they be children? -- of their containing
> element node, or context element node.  So the element can 
> have attribute
> children.  ...  So @ are children, but those children do not have parents?

> 

Actually, you've come to exactly the opposite of the truth. An element is
the parent of its attributes, but the attributes are not children of the
element.

And if that seems absurd, just substitute some non-biological words like
"controller" and "component" for "parent" and "child", and it doesn't seem
so bad.

Mike K


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