Mukul Gandhi wrote:
thanks David for the answer. I have few more questions
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:13 PM, David Carlisle
<davidc(_at_)nag(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
X[position()=2][position()=2]
I think this would mean, X[2][2] which will always be an empty sequence, i.e.
()
am I correct?
apart from this use case you cited, are all other forms equivalent
(which do not involve positional predicates)?
No.
like,
X[(_at_)a='hi'][(_at_)b='hi..']
If X[(_at_)a='hi'] matches a node, then that node will become the context
node when evaluating [(_at_)b='hi..']
would be same as
X[(_at_)a='hi' and @b='hi..']
X is the context node here, so the predicate will be considering @b='hi..'
X[P][Q] is equivalent to X[P and Q] if and only if Q does not depend on
the context node at all.
To extend this:
X[P][Q][]...[Z] is equivalent to X[P and Q ... and Z] if and only if Q,
R, .. Z do not depend on the context node at all.
(In all cases, X is the context node when evaluating P, so P can depend
on the context node.)
Ronan
--
Ronan Klyne
Business Collaborator Developer
Tel: +44 01189 028518
ronan(_dot_)klyne(_at_)groupbc(_dot_)com
www.groupbc.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>
--~--