I'm not sure I want that ~ operator MORE than I want to be able to stuff
XPath expressions into macros, but if there are votes, I would vote in favour
of it.
Ahh yes, while we're casting imaginary votes, I want that macro feature too. :)
It is the feature I didn't know I wanted back when I asked this question:
https://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/202201/msg00000.html
I basically wanted to be able to define a complex XPath expression somewhere
once, then reuse it here and there as needed.
In the end, I took Wendell and Eliot's advice to emulate a macro using a
function and templates:
https://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/202201/msg00010.html
https://www.biglist.com/lists/lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/archives/202201/msg00011.html
but a macro capability would certainly be much more elegant! The
function/template approach works, but is verbosely verbose.
- Chris
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
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
--~--