On Fri, 2015-03-20 at 12:56 +0000, Russell Urquhart
russurquhart1(_at_)verizon(_dot_)net wrote:
As for moving towards XSLT 2.0, i have been wanting to get there but
feel i first have to fully understand XSLT 1.0 first! But i'm
getting there!
"I can't move to these new-fangled automobiles until I understand how
to make my own cartwheel with a spokeshave!" :-)
Seriously, I'd say, build some tests and try moving as soon as you can.
Liam
Thanks to everyone here for your time and patience!
Russ
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 07:34:23PM +0000, Wendell Piez
wapiez@wendellpiez.comwrote:
Russ,
Yeah -- the for-each pulls all the errata_section elements that
happen to be the first one of the entire set with the same value
for module_impacted -- except that since you've added
module_impact siblings, it will be those that are the first one of
the set of all errata_section with *any* of the same
module_impacted values. The key can work many-to-one, and it does.
This means in principle a module_impacted can be dropped (if it
never appears outside parents that are also bound to other modules
mentioned earlier).
To use Muenchian grouping, write your key to the module_impacted
elements themselves (by their values), not their parents. Then
for-each select="//module_impacted[generate-id() =
generate-id(key('module_impact_mentions',string(.))[1])]">
to iterate over these values (or rather, over a set of node
proxies for them).
Or ditch the Muenchian grouping and join the modern world - XSLT
2.0.
Cheers, Wendell
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:45 PM, russurquhart1(_at_)verizon(_dot_)net<
xsl-list-service(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi All,
I have a question about using Muenchian Method in a specific
situation.
I have an xml source file like the following:
<errata_section id="i875"
errata_type="bug"><title>Title</title><description> <para>
Following a warm Reset </para></description><devices_impacted>
<device_name>VAZER</device_name></devices_impacted><module_impacted>Boot</module_impacted></errata_section>
The existing xsl, that i am supporting, but didn't write, uses
the following key:
<xsl:key name="module-index" match="errata_section"
use="module_impacted"/>
And they have used the following Muenchian Method algorithm to
go through all the unique module_impacted elements.
<xsl:for-each select="//errata_section[generate-id(.)=generate-
id(key('module-index', module_impacted)[1])]"> <xsl:sort
select="module_impacted"/>
<!-- Determine module_impacted elements, for given device_name,
and output table. -->
</xsl:for-each>
Everything went fine until, over time, we have added additional
module_impacted siblings to the errata_section element like this:
<errata_section id="i876"
errata_type="bug"><title>Title</title><description> <para>
Following a warm Reset </para></description><devices_impacted>
<device_name>VAZER</device_name></devices_impacted><module_impacted>Boot</module_impacted><module_impacted>Power-
On</module_impacted><module_impacted>DMA</module_impacted></errata_section>
Once this happened we started to see that not all
module_impacted elements were being found for the given
device_name. My question is, is this happening because the
element we are doing the generate-id function on, in some cases
would have multiple siblings in a given errata_section element?
Most of the examples i have seen of using Muenchian Method are
keying on a unique elment value that doesn't have any similar
named siblings.
I'm just trying to understand if this structure would work at
all. Thanks for any info you can provide and thank you Martin
Honnen for your help so far!
Russ
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
EasyUnsubscribe: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/unsub/xsl-list/1167547
or by email: xsl-list-unsub(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
--~--