Hi
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of
David(_dot_)Pawson(_at_)rnib(_dot_)org(_dot_)uk
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 8:17 AM
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [xsl] document() access. The combinations
(...)
6 differences! (I assume your 'disabled' ones failed unrecoverable).
Yes, they failed with all processors put kept msxsl from processing the
others so they had to be disabled to see the remaining results
file:/uriIncl.xml
file:///uriIncl.xml
file://h:/uriIncl.xml I assume you had access to such a drive (over the
network)?
I've mapped a network drive to c:, so using h: was the same as using c:
(...)
Mmm. My h: drive is mapped to \\church etc.
church is just the machine name, in my case I used lanowar instead. This is
how windows connect to network shares, it use \\{machine name}\{share name}
Am I right in thinking you don't have such an equivalent drive,
or were they genuine failures?
I had h: drive mapped to c: so this failures can be considered genuine.
AAlbuquerque
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list