Yves Forkl wrote:
Like I (partially) wrote, I prefer to leave the condition equalling
this third case implied in my xsl:otherwise clause, while explicitly
testing for the other two cases using xsl:when.
Just a thought, based on what I think to grasp from what you want to do:
<!-- holds a sequence to two numbers, one with @my.. one with all-->
<xsl:variable name="mytest" select="count(*/@my_atrribute), count(*)"
as="xs:integer+" />
<!-- choosing between the four possible scenarios. Note: order is
important! -->
<xsl:choose>
<xsl:when test="$mytest[1] = $mytest[2]">
<!-- every child has @my_attribute -->
</xsl:when>
<xsl:when test="$mytest[1]">
<!-- some childs has @my_attribute -->
</xsl:when>
<xsl:when test="$mytest[2]">
<!-- no childs have @my_attribute -->
</xsl:when>
<xsl:otherwise>
<!-- no childs at all -->
</xsl:otherwise>
<xsl:choose>
As I said, just a thought, and perhaps way easier to write down and/or
to understand. Like Larry Wall said: there's more than one way to do it.
Cheers,
-- Abel Braaksma
http://www.nuntia.nl
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--