[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: mapping (Was: Re: [xsl] Re: . in for)
Subject: RE: mapping (Was: Re: [xsl] Re: . in for) From: Joerg Pietschmann <joerg.pietschmann@xxxxxx> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 14:07:02 +0100 |
DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > Yes, I suppose to follow a standard function form it should be > select ='map (lower-case(), $departments)'. Is there a reason why we can't identify and pass functions by their QName? We could then write select ='map(xf:lower-case, $departments)'. This would circumvent the lexical problems. Probably this avoids having functions as data type in the data model, although their QNames de facto are used as such. > I'm sure David C or Dimitre could extend this to a piped form? > Guessing, > select='map (fnA(), (map (fnb(), $departments)))' If Jeni's proposal for having XSLT functions constructing sequences is accepted, this should be perfectly possible. I'd omit unnecessary spaces and parenthesis: select='map(fnA(), map(fnb(), $departments))' or select='map(my:fnA, map(my:fnb, $departments))' Regards J.Pietschmann XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: mapping (Was: Re: [xsl] Re: . i, David Carlisle | Thread | Re: mapping (Was: Re: [xsl] Re: . i, Jeni Tennison |
Re: [xsl] xsl architecture issue, Mattias Konradsson | Date | Re: [xsl] Content constructors and , Jeni Tennison |
Month |
Keywords