Re: Calculating cumulative values - another call for h

On 8/30/07, Simon Shutter <simon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Sorry - I should have been more clear. Could one use something like
count(ancestor::set) instead?

Probably not the thing to use... but its hard to suggest what to do
instead just from that sentence....

Just changing "n" to "3" is enough to make it work with your sample
input - if you're suggesting that set/@id isn't like it is in your
sample and you're having problems adapting the transform to work with
your actual input then post a more representative sample.

Cheers,
-- Abel Braaksma