[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: How efficient is DVC? - A grouping example
David, you are right. I've already been pointed out by Dimitre that my assumption about the key() function is not correct. If I had known about this I would have gone to such lengths. Still, I think the binary tree algorithm I suggest still has some nice properties, unless I'm also mistaken here. Cheers, Robbert ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Carlisle" <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> To: <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 11:31 PM Subject: Re: How efficient is DVC? - A grouping example > > > > Tree-fragments are heavily used when multiple passes are needed to compute a > > result with only one stylesheet. However, you cannot use the key() function on > > tree-fragments because XSLT doesn't allow you to (there is no nodeset parameter) > > To use result tree fragments at all as a node set you need to use an > xx:node-set() extension (as you have done) all implementations of > node-set that I have seen then return a tree rooted at a document > node. Keys may be used with such "temporary documents" just as with any > other node. key() will index in the document which contains the current > node so so long as the current node is a descendent of the root returned > by xx:node-set($x) the key will work as required. > > David > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > > 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
|