Yves Savourel wrote: > OK. I'm think I'm with you now. > > A) its:selector="//p[@trans='false']" applies only to the selected nodes, not to their children (except by inheritence if they don't > have any other rules applied to them) > > B) when we need to overwrite the children we have to specify it explicitely in the selector: its:selector="//p[@trans='false']//*". > > So we do indeed have already a way to "overwrite or not all previous rules". [I was lost because I thought we were interpreting > //text[@localize='no'] as //text[@localize='no']/descendant-or-self::*, now we have establish we do not, everything makes sense > again]. sorry for the confusion, which was created by my mail :( Cheers, Felix > > Things are logical again, but I'm still not sure being able to "overwrite or not all previous rules" resolve all cases. I'll try to > come up with test cases. > > Cheers, > -yves > >Received on Monday, 27 March 2006 15:12:34 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:46 GMT