This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: positional predicates in XPath vs XQL
- From: "Howard Katz" <howardk at fatdog dot com>
- To: <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 21:10:43 -0800
- Subject: RE: [xsl] positional predicates in XPath vs XQL
- Reply-to: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Fallacious raciotination obviously.
I'll bite. What is the correct result in the XPath case??
Howard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com]On Behalf Of Christopher
> R. Maden
> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 7:45 PM
> To: xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com
> Subject: Re: [xsl] positional predicates in XPath vs XQL
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> At 15:35 23-11-2001, Howard Katz wrote:
> >In XQL if you say:
> > /section/para[ 1 ]
> >and you have a tree that looks like this:
> >
> >1 section
> >2 para
> >3 para
> >4 section
> >5 para
> >6 section
> >7 para
> >8 para
> >9 para
> >
> >you'll get back this nodeset:
> >
> ><2>, <5>, <7>
> >
> >To my understanding, the same location path in XPath only
> returns a single
> >node, <2>. Is my understanding correct?
>
> No. Whence did you acquire it?
>
> ~Chris
> - --
> Christopher R. Maden, Principal Consultant, HMM Consulting Int'l, Inc.
> DTDs/schemas - conversion - ebooks - publishing - Web - B2B - training
> <URL: http://www.hmmci.com/ > <URL: http://crism.maden.org/consulting/ >
> PGP Fingerprint: BBA6 4085 DED0 E176 D6D4 5DFC AC52 F825 AFEC 58DA
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP Personal Privacy 6.5.8
>
> iQA/AwUBO/8XtaxS+CWv7FjaEQIgdQCeJJkgv+IE9KMt1glpCot9/r0nF/YAn3cM
> E9LJS5WYLPYO3ds6L5MIqPG8
> =g29q
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
>
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list