# With that coreection I do understand the expression. But may # it be that there is another typo in it? What about the "<<" # operator? Shouldn't it be ">>" instead for following-sibling? # Yes, it clearly should. Michael KayReceived on Monday, 22 March 2004 12:03:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 3 October 2007 16:05:55 GMT