[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Requirements for XSLT 1.1 (rtf/node set to boolean coerc
I have noted this correction on page 427 of Mike Kay's excellent book. I, too, was confused and was ready to defend Mike's published interpretation. However, a closer reading of the spec (section 11.1) does say "A result tree fragment is treated equivalently to a node-set that contains just a single root node. ... When a permitted operation is performed on a result tree fragment, it is performed exactly as it would be on the equivalent node-set." That cleared it up for me. HTH, Gary Evan Lenz wrote: > > What Mike Kay said a couple weeks ago: > > <quote> > I wrongly suggested in my book (sorry, Microsoft) that the implicit coercion > had a side-effect in causing the conversion of a result tree fragment to a > boolean to give the wrong answer. In fact converting a result tree fragment > to a boolean should always give the answer "true", and it was Saxon that was > wrong in returning the result of > boolean(string($rtf)) > </quote> > > -----Original Message----- > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of David Carlisle > Subject: Requirements for XSLT 1.1 (rtf/node set to boolean coercion) > > Looks good! > > One question/comment on result tree fragment/node set unification. > > The new requirements document is worded so as to imply that the only > difference between rtf and node-set is the restriction of the allowed > operators. > > I had thought that the other difference was coercion to boolean, > [snip] 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
|