[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
It is my understanding that if you have:
and you happen to be on the 3rd f node you would get:
preceding-sibling::field/@id=1
and current()/@id=2
but if you use:
preceding-sibling::field[1]/@id=2
Is this wrong?
-Rob
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Re: [xsl] Expression Logic Problem
Subject: Re: [xsl] Expression Logic Problem From: "Robert S. Koberg" <rob@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 16:25:14 -0700 |
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
From Joerg's example:
> > 1. preceding-sibling: > > Instead of <xsl:if test="self::node()[1]"> use <xsl:if > test="not(preceding-sibling::field/@id = @id)">
won't this return the very first field in document order?
best, -Rob
No, it only tests whether there is not a preceding-sibling field element, which has the same @id like the current one.
You can write "not(preceding-sibling::field[@id = current()/@id])" if you want.
It is my understanding that if you have:
<a> <f id="1"/> <f id="2"/> <f id="2"/> </a>
and you happen to be on the 3rd f node you would get:
preceding-sibling::field/@id=1
and current()/@id=2
but if you use:
preceding-sibling::field[1]/@id=2
Is this wrong?
-Rob
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Expression Logic Problem, Joerg Heinicke | Thread | Re: [xsl] Expression Logic Problem, Joerg Heinicke |
Re: [xsl] Expression Logic Problem, Robert S. Koberg | Date | Re: [xsl] Expression Logic Problem, Joerg Heinicke |
Month |