[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XPath: better way to check for text nodes that are
[ Lars Huttar] > Tom Passim wrote: > > You could use > > > > test='not(.//*[local-name() != "vernac" and local-name() != > > "gloss"]/text()[1] > > | text())' > > Hmm... I don't think this would give the correct result in all cases, > e.g. if we have > ./llcd:vernac/llcd:stretch/text() > this should be legal, but it would show up as illegal by your test. > Oh, yes, I read your criterion as "children" but you really wrote "descendants". If llcd:vernac and llcd:gloss could only be immediate children of the current node, then you could just change it to this - count(*[local-name() != "vernac" and local-name() !="gloss"]//text()[1] | text()) Otherwise this kind of approach gets more complicated and one of the other suggestions already posted would be better. As to efficiency, that is likely to be very processor-dependent since it may depend on optimizations. You would need to test to be sure. Cheers, Tom P 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
|