RE: length of string from a set of nodes.

I often tell people to avoid using an xsl:variable with content when they
could use the select attribute.

In fact, if (a) you have an "as" attribute, and (b) the content is
xsl:sequence, then the two constructs are pretty well equivalent. I would
rewrite

<xsl:variable name="slen" as="xs:integer"><xsl:sequence 
  select="string-length($strings)"/></xsl:variable>

as

<xsl:variable name="slen" as="xs:integer" select="string-length($strings)"/>

but the difference is essentially aesthetic.

But value-of should be rewritten:

<xsl:variable name="strings" as="xs:string"><xsl:value-of 
> select="answers"/></xsl:variable>

should either be

<xsl:variable name="strings" as="xs:string"><xsl:sequence 
> select="answers"/></xsl:variable>

or more simply

<xsl:variable name="strings" as="xs:string" select="answers"/>

That's because xsl:value-of creates a text node, which you don't need to do.

And of course, you could combine the two variables:

<xsl:variable name="slen" as="xs:integer" select="string-length(answers)"/>

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Christian [mailto:fredc@xxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 27 March 2009 17:46
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject:  length of string from a set of nodes.
> 
> I was able to get this to work, but while reading about it, I 
> see all these little tips and recommendations regarding being 
> efficient and not creating nodes when you only need strings.
> 
> In this code my goal was meet of deciding if the length of 
> all the text concatenated together is greater than 30.
>     <xsl:variable name="strings" as="xs:string"><xsl:value-of 
> select="answers"/></xsl:variable>
>     <xsl:variable name="slen" as="xs:integer"><xsl:sequence 
> select="string-length($strings)"/></xsl:variable>
>     <xsl:for-each select="answers">
>         <xsl:choose>
>             <xsl:when test="$slen gt 30"> etc...
> 
> I tried various combinations of using the <<concat()>> 
> function, <<xsl:sequence>>, and <<xsl:value-of>>. This is 
> what ended up working.
> 
> Is there a "better" way to do this?
> Thanks