Thanks, Andrew for the clarification.
In this particular problem, since the context node was an element,
therefore ancestor:: axis would certainly have only element nodes. So
ancestor::node() will work for this particular example. You rightly
explained this :)
But I thought, explicitly specifying the kind of nodes (say, with ..,
* or element()) once must search on an XPath axis is a good design
principle with XSLT programs.
On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Andrew Welch
<andrew(_dot_)j(_dot_)welch(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
<pedant>
I agree that in general using node() when really you mean element() is
a poor choice, however on the ancestor axis it's probably not going to
make that much difference.... In the vast majority of cases the only
type of nodes that exist on the ancestor axis are elements (and the
single document node).
</pedant>
--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--