[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: [xsl] why is "(chapter//footnote)[1]" illegal?
Subject: RE: [xsl] why is "(chapter//footnote)[1]" illegal? From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 09:03:43 -0400 (EDT) |
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, Michael Kay wrote: > > boning up on my predicates and patterns, i'm reading > > kay, p. 443, which states: > > > > "(chapter//footnote)[1] is not a valid pattern. (Why not? > > No good reason, it's just that the spec doesn't allow it." > > > > but on p. 408, there is an explanation of the (apparently > > acceptable) path expression "(chapter/para)[1]". > > > > so is it just the difference between using the child axis > > and the descendant-or-self axis? it's not obvious to me > > why the first should be illegal while the second is legal. > > The syntax for patterns is a small subset of the syntax for XPath > expressions, and the subset doesn't allow parentheses. > > The subset was chosen to make it easy for implementations to test > whether a node matches a pattern without going through the full > algorithm of evaluating the expression for every ancestor of the node > being tested. i realize by now why i was just being dense. ever have one of those days when you just want to take back your last few posts? argh. i have *got* to stop drinking decaf. rday XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] why is "(chapter//footnot, Michael Kay | Thread | AW: [xsl] Preserving inline element, Markus Abt |
Re: [xsl] Re: Re: EXSL's dyn:evalua, raphead | Date | [xsl] jaxp vs xalan, Neelam Checknita |
Month |
Keywords