No [2] means that a 2nd one exists which would be true if a 3rd one existed etc.
The full dataset picks up instances where there is more than one
duplicate so I can verify the above interpretation.
Having said that your offering although more verbose is superior
semantically as really the best way to write this is something like
(and I am pleading the fifth on the syntax here)
exists(key('person',@href)[2]) but then you look at that and you
realise or can argue (I think) that what I wrote is an abbreviated
form of that anyway.
I suppose a guru could tell whether they are semantically identical
and whether the one abbreviates the other.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Graydon <graydon(_at_)marost(_dot_)ca> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 04:38:49PM -0800, Dimitre Novatchev scripsit:
<xsl:key name="person" match="a" use="@href"/>
<xsl:template match="person">
<duplicate>
<xsl:copy-of select="a[key('person',@href)[2]]"/>
</duplicate>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
Can I note that the [2] would appear to suppose that there's only ever
one duplicate?
not(position() eq 1) is likely safer.
-- Graydon
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--