[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

Re: [xsl] Muenchian work if more than one value is present

---

---

Thank you Wendell and also a big thanks to Martin, for helping me to understand this.

As i had inherited this xslt from someone else, who was no longer at my company, i wasn't really sure what he was trying to do, and when we added sibling module_impacted elements, i wasn't sure if what we had would continue to work.

I suspected that doing the grouping at the parent errata_section element was the problem, as we were skipping elements. Some, but not all! (And as i changed the code slightly, i would skip elements that i had previously gotten.) But what i didn't know was if either Muenchian grouping, or grouping in XSLT 2.0, would handle the situation that i was now facing. (This partly due to the fact that all examples i had seen of either grouping method, never really matched my situation.) I didn't know if the structure of our xml source could be parsed with some XSLT magic or if i'd somehow have to code a search function to go through all the elements. I hoped not, and that has proven to be true!

As for moving towards XSLT 2.0, i have been wanting to get there but feel i first have to fully understand XSLT 1.0 first! But i'm getting there!

Thanks to everyone here for your time and patience!


Russ



On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 07:34:23PM +0000, Wendell Piez wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Russ,
> 
> Yeah -- the for-each pulls all the errata_section elements that happen
> to be the first one of the entire set with the same value for
> module_impacted -- except that since you've added module_impact
> siblings, it will be those that are the first one of the set of all
> errata_section with *any* of the same module_impacted values. The key
> can work many-to-one, and it does. This means in principle a
> module_impacted can be dropped (if it never appears outside parents
> that are also bound to other modules mentioned earlier).
> 
> To use Muenchian grouping, write your key to the module_impacted
> elements themselves (by their values), not their parents. Then
> 
> for-each select="//module_impacted[generate-id() =
>    generate-id(key('module_impact_mentions',string(.))[1])]">
> 
> to iterate over these values (or rather, over a set of node proxies for them).
> 
> Or ditch the Muenchian grouping and join the modern world - XSLT 2.0.
> 
> Cheers, Wendell
> 
> 
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:45 PM, russurquhart1@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >  Hi All,
> >
> > I have a question about using Muenchian Method in a specific situation.
> >
> > I have an xml source file like the following:
> >
> > <errata_section id="i875" errata_type="bug"><title>Title</title><description> <para> Following a warm Reset </para></description><devices_impacted> <device_name>VAZER</device_name></devices_impacted><module_impacted>Boot</module_impacted></errata_section>
> >
> > The existing xsl, that i am supporting, but didn't write, uses the following key:
> >
> > <xsl:key name="module-index" match="errata_section" use="module_impacted"/>
> >
> > And they have used the following Muenchian Method algorithm to go through all the unique module_impacted elements.
> >
> >
> > <xsl:for-each select="//errata_section[generate-id(.)=generate-id(key('module-index', module_impacted)[1])]"> <xsl:sort select="module_impacted"/>
> > <!-- Determine module_impacted elements, for given device_name, and output table. -->
> >
> > </xsl:for-each>
> >
> > Everything went fine until, over time, we have added additional module_impacted siblings to the errata_section element like this:
> >
> > <errata_section id="i876" errata_type="bug"><title>Title</title><description> <para> Following a warm Reset </para></description><devices_impacted> <device_name>VAZER</device_name></devices_impacted><module_impacted>Boot</module_impacted><module_impacted>Power-On</module_impacted><module_impacted>DMA</module_impacted></errata_section>
> >
> > Once this happened we started to see that not all module_impacted elements were being found for the given device_name. My question is, is this happening because the element we are doing the generate-id function on, in some cases would have multiple siblings in a given errata_section element? Most of the examples i have seen of using Muenchian Method are keying on a unique elment value that doesn't have any similar named siblings.
> >
> > I'm just trying to understand if this structure would work at all.
> > Thanks for any info you can provide and thank you Martin Honnen for your help so far!
> >
> > Russ
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Wendell Piez | http://www.wendellpiez.com
> XML | XSLT | electronic publishing
> Eat Your Vegetables
> _____oo_________o_o___ooooo____ooooooo_^

---