[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Dave Pawson wrote:
It is not much different to '=' in XSLT/XPath 1.0 only instead of comparing node-sets it has been generalized to comparing sequences of items. But already with XPath 1.0 if you compare to node-sets e.g.
$foo = $bar
then the comparison is true if there is at least one node in $foo and in $bar for which the comparison is true.
No, the first argument string is returned.
--
Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0
Subject: Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0 From: Martin Honnen <Martin.Honnen@xxxxxx> Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:55:51 +0200 |
Dave Pawson wrote:
<xsl:template match="skillarea[tokenize(@targets,'|')=tokenize($param,'|')]"/>
This is the 'odd' meaning of = in xslt 2? If any item on LHS is present in RHS then = returns true.
It is not much different to '=' in XSLT/XPath 1.0 only instead of comparing node-sets it has been generalized to comparing sequences of items. But already with XPath 1.0 if you compare to node-sets e.g.
$foo = $bar
then the comparison is true if there is at least one node in $foo and in $bar for which the comparison is true.
Issue:
What happens with tokenize when the separator is missing?
empty set?
No, the first argument string is returned.
--
Martin Honnen http://msmvps.com/blogs/martin_honnen/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Dave Pawson | Thread | Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Dave Pawson |
Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Dave Pawson | Date | Re: [xsl] set union? xslt 2.0, Dave Pawson |
Month |