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

RE: Pattern for attribute matching

---

---

Can you explain how your first 'match' differs from your third 'match'? I
know the English language description is different but I don't see the
practical difference between the two.

For example, are you looking for child elements of foo with bar attributes?

Thanks.			...edN

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Paul W. Abrahams
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 4:16 PM
> To: XSL listserve
> Subject: Pattern for attribute matching
>
>
> If I want to construct a template that matches a `foo' element with a
> `bar' attribute, the appropriate `match' attribute is:
>
>     match="foo[@bar]"
>
> Moreover, if I want to match any `bar' attribute at all, the
> appropriate
> `match' attribute is
>
>    match="@bar"
>
> But suppose I want to match a `bar' attribute that's attached
> to a `foo'
> element.  My first guess would be
>
>   match="foo/@bar"
>
> But that doesn't seem entirely right because attributes are
> not children
> of element nodes, but rather associated with element nodes.
> So if that
> isn't correct, what would be correct?
>
> This question relates to a larger unresolved (apparently) issue in
> XPath: whether attribute nodes are really part of the document tree
> described by XPath, or related in some other way.  Sec. 5 (Data Model)
> says:
>
>    ``XPath operates on a XML document as a tree.  This
> section descripe
> how XPath models an XML document as a tree.''
>
> But in Sec. 5.3 (Attribute Nodes) it says:
>
>    ``Each element node has an associated set of attribute nodes.''
>
> So where does reality lie?
>
> Paul Abrahams
> abrahams@xxxxxxx
>
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

---