At 10:36 AM 8/15/2006, I wrote:
What you gain somewhere, you loose it elsewhere. For example in the
simple "definition" of "//" (something like "it is identical to
descendant::").
Ah, but that definition is inaccurate, which is why the difficulty
arises to begin with.
Another inaccuracy in the definition of "//" as identical to
descendant::* is that "//@*" catches attributes, while descendant::*
does not (and descendant::@* is a syntax error). Fortunately this
distinction doesn't matter in the case of reaching after the first
descendant x element.
Cheers,
Wendell
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--