[Bug 22127] Allow xsl:next-match inside xsl:for-each


--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> ---
I'd like to see a compelling use case. 

My instincts are against adding more "current this" and "current that" values;
even if scoped statically to a template rule, they add semantic complexity. For
example, this facility would complicate the streamability rules. If we did
introduce a "current matched node" I think we would need an interrogative
function to return it. (In practice, I suspect this new function would then be
used a lot more than the proposed xsl:next-match facility...)

You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 21 May 2013 22:30:46 UTC