RE: [xsl] Re: XPath riddle

["Nikolaos Giannadakis" <ngiann at csd dot uoc dot gr>]

> I cannot understand why you exclude a node in your second example
> -- this node
> perfectly matches your definition of the result node-set.
>

This node is defined inside F and may have some other type (as would be
defined in a schema).
The generic problem is "how to select the node you want inside a possibly
recursive xml file, when the
the same pattern may appear somewhere in between in anonther context....




>
> > Can you tell what the XPath expression that:
> >  "selects all C elements that come after A and have a D parent" is.
> >
>
> (//A/following::C | //A/descendant::C)[parent::D]
>
> >  That is, there might be a schema, which declares the unwanted
> instances of C
> >  as integers, while
> >  the other C declared has some anonymous complexType.
> >
> >  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> >  <A>
> >          <B>
> >                  <C/>
>  <!-- DO NOT
> select this -->
> >                  <D>
> >                          <!-- recursion is introduced here -->
> >                          <C>
>  <!-- select this
> -->
> >                                  <B>
> >                                          <C/>
>  <!-- DO NOT
> select this -->>
> >                                          <D>
> >                                                  <C/>
>  <!-- select this
> -->
> >                                          </D>
> >                                  </B>
> >                          </C>
> >                  </D>
> >          </B>
> >  </A>
>
> >  /A//D/C (/A/descendant::D/C) would suffice, or, better, /A//B/D/C
> >  (/A/descendant::B/D/C). But this would not rule out the
> possibility of the
> >  B/D/C pattern appearing somewhere after A in another context.
>                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ??????????
>
> What "context"? You do not define any particular "context" in
> your original
> definition of the wanted result set. There's something you
> haven't told us.
>
> Please, explain this statement.
>
> >  I cannot find
> >  any XPath feature that would handle recursion.
> >
> >  <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> >  <A>
> >          <B>
> >                  <F>
> >                          <B>
> >                                  <D>
> >                                          <C/>
>  <!-- this would
> be selected incorrectly -->
>
> Why, it exactly matches your definition -- this is a "C" node
> that follows "A" and
> has a "D" parent.
>
>
> >                                  </D>
> >                          </B>
> >                  </F>
> >                  <D>
> >                          <!-- recursion is introduced here -->
> >                          <C>
>  <!-- select this
> -->
> >                                  <B>
> >                                          <C/>
>  <!-- DO NOT
> select this -->
> >                                          <D>
> >                                                  <C/>
>  <!-- select this
> -->
> >                                          </D>
> >                                  </B>
> >                          </C>
> >                  </D>
> >          </B>
> >  </A>
> >
> >  Using /A/B/D/C | /A/B/D/C//B/D/C would overcome this, but you
> can see how I
> >  could create another problematic example...
> >  How does one find one's way around this, using a generic XPath
> approach?
> >  I am not saying this is good XML design. To the contrary! ...
> it is legal,
> >  nonetheless ...any ideas?
>
> Once again, could you provide a correct definition of your result
> set? The node you
> want excluded in your second example matches exactly your
> definition of the result
> set.
>
> Cheers,
> Dimitre Novatchev.
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
>


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