[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
No ambiguity from where I sit, and I quote from the XPath 1.0 REC
"Thus, the ancestor, ancestor-or-self, preceding, and preceding-sibling
axes are reverse axes; all other axes are forward axes. The proximity
position of a member of a node-set with respect to an axis is defined to
be the position of the node in the node-set ordered in document order if
the axis is a forward axis and ordered in reverse document order if the
axis is a reverse axis. The first position is 1."
--
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
The primary function of the design engineer is to make things difficult
for the fabricator and impossible for the serviceman.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Feblowitz [mailto:mfeblowitz@frictionless.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 2:51 PM
> To: 'Garland foster'; Eric van der Vlist
> Cc: Dare Obasanjo; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Quick Xpath
>
>
> Could it be that Spy's XPath evaluator got the numbering wrong?
>
> Could it be that there's ambiguity in the XPath Rec?
>
> My understanding is that the first preceding-sibling is not
> the first in a list of preceding siblings, but the most
> immediate preceding sibling.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Garland foster [mailto:garland_foster@salutia.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:45 PM
> To: Eric van der Vlist
> Cc: Mark Feblowitz; 'Dare Obasanjo'; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Quick Xpath
>
> Gee,
> file://b[preceding-sibling::*[last()][self::a]]
> This doesn't return anything in Cooktop but it does work with
> XML-SPY (!!)
>
> Now the Standings are:
> XML-Cooktop 3
> XML-SPY 1
> Eric 1
> Garland 0
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
> To: Garland foster <garland_foster@salutia.com>
> Cc: Mark Feblowitz <mfeblowitz@frictionless.com>; 'Dare
> Obasanjo' <dareo@microsoft.com>; <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 6:38 PM
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Quick Xpath
>
>
> > Your test case:
> >
> > <foo>
> > <b/>
> > <a/>
> > <b/>
> > <a/>
> > <b/>
> > </foo>
> >
> > doesn't differentiate a "b" with at least a preceding
> sibling "a" from
> > a "b" whose immediate preceding is a "a"!
> >
> > On Wed, 2002-07-17 at 23:29, Garland foster wrote:
> > > XMLCooktop works with file://b[preceding-sibling::*[self::a]]
> >
> > Yes, but this matches any "b" having any preceding-sibling equal to
> > "a".
> > > or
> > > file://b[preceding-sibling::*[1][self::a]]
> > > or
> > > file://b[local-name(preceding-sibling::*[1])='a']
> >
> > As Jeni mentioned, [self:a] has the advantage of also testing that
> > your "a" element has no namespace.
> > >
> > > While XML-SPY works with file://b[preceding-sibling::*[self::a]]
> >
> > But again, that's not selective enough for your request.
> > > but not with
> > > file://b[preceding-sibling::*[1][self::a]]
> > > and doesn't work either with
> > > file://b[local-name(preceding-sibling::*[1])='a']
> > >
> > > Interesting, which processor is wrong/right and why?
> >
> > Do you really think a XSLT processor may be right against Jeni :-) ?
> >
> > No, I am kidding and I think Jeni's wrong here and this should be:
> >
> > file://b[preceding-sibling::*[last()][self::a]]
> >
> > (preceding-sibling returns the nodes by document order)
> >
> > Eric
> > --
> > See you in San Diego.
> >
> > http://conferences.oreillynet.com/os2002/
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> > Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org
> http://dyomedea.com
> > (W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1
> http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.373 / Virus Database: 208 - Release Date: 7/1/02
>
|
