This is the mail archive of the xsl-list@mulberrytech.com mailing list .
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
From Joerg's example: > > 1. preceding-sibling: > > Instead of <xsl:if test="self::node()[1]"> use <xsl:if > test="not(preceding-sibling::field/@id = @id)"> won't this return the very first field in document order? best, -Rob
No, it only tests whether there is not a preceding-sibling field element, which has the same @id like the current one.
You can write "not(preceding-sibling::field[@id = current()/@id])" if you want.
It is my understanding that if you have: <a> <f id="1"/> <f id="2"/> <f id="2"/> </a> and you happen to be on the 3rd f node you would get: preceding-sibling::field/@id=1 and current()/@id=2 but if you use: preceding-sibling::field[1]/@id=2 Is this wrong? -Rob XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |