W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > July to September 1998

Re: XSL working draft

From: Barb Munsil <barbara.munsil@internetMCI.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 23:33:23 -0600
To: xsl-editors@w3.org
Cc: wes_munsil@csgsystems.com
Message-id: <35E39E1F.E490767C@internetMCI.com>
Thank you.  I see that now.  I apologize for my error, and for mistyping the Cc address.

James Clark wrote:

> *[attribute(foo)] does NOT mean the same as attribute(foo).  The latter
> returns the foo attribute of the current node, whereas the former
> returns the current node's element children that have a foo attribute.
>
> Barb Munsil wrote:
> >
> > Dear Sirs:
> >
> > The effect of the production for NodePatterns is to allow the final ElementPattern in an
> > ElementPatterns, if it is the form *[attribute(QName)], to be replaced by the shorthand
> > attribute(QName).  This allowance is non-orthogonal in two respects:  it is only made for the final
> > ElementPattern; and it is not made for any other Qualifier or combination of Qualifiers.  Moreover,
> > it seems to be of little practical utility.  The grammar and language would be simplified, with no
> > loss of expressive power, if it were removed.  This could be done, for example, by removing the
> > production for NodePatterns, and replacing NodePatterns by ElementPatterns in the production for
> > AncestryPattern.
> >
> > Thank you for your consideration.
> >
> > Dr. Wes Munsil
Received on Wednesday, 26 August 1998 01:34:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:49 GMT