Subject: RE: [xsl] Patterns usage in XSLT template rules From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 15:17:42 +0100 |
> Sorry for not being clear enough, but I had meant to ask "why are > patterns like (foo) or (/child::foo) considered invalid patterns as > per XSLT specification ?" The syntax for patterns was designed as a subset of XPath path expressions that makes it easy and efficient to test whether a particular node is selected by the expression or not. Clearly there are a number of ways this subset could have been expanded - including some useful ways such as allowing a/b/(d|e) - but on the whole, the current definition seems to have provided most of what users need while remaining efficient to implement, and there has been little pressure to change it. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Patterns usage in XSLT te, Ramkumar Menon | Thread | Re: [xsl] Patterns usage in XSLT te, Wendell Piez |
Re: [xsl] Re: Random?, Ali Choumane | Date | RE: [xsl] character entities, Edward Bryant |
Month |