Re: Collecting attributes from the ancestor-or-self ax

> I don't think that's right. By definition node-set is "an unordered 
> collection of nodes without duplicates". So all dublicates have to be 
> removed at the time of XPath expresison evaluating and the order may be 
> any one appropriate to XPath processor.

the order that matters in this case (the order of any attribute nodes
that have the same name) is not processor dependent.
in attribute-or-self::*/@* you get a node set consisting entirely of
attribute nodes, many of which may have the same name. But any attribute
nodes with the same name must have come from different elements, and so
document order is defined by Xpath and is not processor dependent.


> <xsl:copy-of> copies nodes in document order, but if you are copying 
> attributes, why do you care about any order?

Because they come from different elements but you are copying them to
the same element, so they over-write each other, so you need to know
that this happens in document order. Fortunately in this case that had
the effect the original poster wanted.

David

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

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