well i agree there is redundancy (damn I should really do this stuff
instead of messing around )
but
<xsl:variable name="h"
select="//xhtml:*[matches(local-name(),'^h[1-6]')]/number(substring(local-name(),2))"/>
<xsl:for-each select="1 to count($h)-1">
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">
<xsl:value-of select="$h[.+1][1]"/>
</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">
<xsl:value-of select="$h[.][1]"/>
</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">
<xsl:value-of select="$h[.+1][2]"/>
</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]"><xsl:value-of select="$h[.][2]"/>
</result>
</xsl:for-each>
</output>
</xsl:template>
produces
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<output>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][1]">2</result>
<result select="$h[.][1]">1</result>
<result select="$h[.+1][2]">5</result>
<result select="$h[.][2]">2</result>
</output>
which I'm not following how $h[.+1][2] will always be empty?
Since there are two items in the sequence I mean. Sorry if I'm not
very clear right now, but I am not thinking especially sharpish.
Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen
On 7/5/07, David Carlisle <davidc(_at_)nag(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
> actually theres more than one item in your sequence that way.
I may have mistyped, but you shouldn't need the [1]'s in for example
$h[.+1][1]
as $h[.+1] is %h[position()=.+1] so can return at most 1 item, so [1] is
redundant.
similarly $h[.+1][2] will always be empty.
David
________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs.
________________________________________________________________________
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--