Re: Transitive closure for XPath

[Joe English <jenglish@flightlab.com>]

Christian Nentwich  wrote:

> > I think this calls for new syntax, either a new keyword or operator.
> [...]
> From a logical point of view, perhaps a new axis (e.g.
> /root/node[1]/closure::id(./@child)) would make sense,

It wouldn't work as an axis either; axis names have to be
followed by a node test and optional predicates,
so again there's nowhere to put the starting set
(first parameter) or iteration expression (second
parameter).

> but a new function is
> a lot easier to implement..

This depends on the host XSLT engine I imagine...
Do other engines use call-by-name internally?


--Joe English

  jenglish@flightlab.com