# Re: question about XPath filter2

From: Aleksey Sanin <aleksey@aleksey.com>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 14:54:10 -0700
Message-ID: <3CE97082.9060103@aleksey.com>

```Thanks! I expected that both answers are 'yes' but decided to make sure :)

Aleksey.

Joseph Reagle wrote:

>On Tuesday 14 May 2002 21:15, Aleksey Sanin wrote:
>
>>In the section 3.4 we compute the S' as follows:
>>
>>    * Compute the set S' consisting of all nodes in the input document
>>      that are either present in S or that have an ancestor in S. This is
>>      equal to the union of all the document subtrees rooted by a node in
>>S.
>>
>>Does this mean that
>>    1) if the node N is in the nodes set S then S' contains all
>>attributes for node N? (expected answer: "yes")
>>
>
>I'd say yes, as the attributes "parent" element node is in S [1].
>
>>    2) if the node N is in the nodes set S then S' contains all
>>namespaces defined in the node N? (expected answer: "yes")
>>
>
>Yes again [2].
>
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116#attribute-nodes
> " the element is the parent of each of these attribute nodes; however, an
>attribute node is not a child of its parent element."
>[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116#namespace-nodes
>"The element is the parent of each of these namespace nodes; however, a
>namespace node is not a child of its parent element."
>
```
Received on Monday, 20 May 2002 17:56:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:21:37 UTC