- From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 09:29:20 +0100
- To: "Raymond Bissonnette" <raybiss@formedia.ca>
- Cc: Toman_Vojtech@emc.com, xproc-dev@w3.org
might be good to amend source to have a more complete test. <html> <head> <title>Topic 01</title> </head> <body> <h1>Topic 01</h1> <div class="header"> <div>some other div content</div> </div> <div class="section"> <h2>T01 - Section 1</h2> <p>Content 01</p> </div> <div class="section"> <h2>T01 - Section 2</h2> <p>Content 02</p> </div> <div class="section"> <h2>T01 - Section 3</h2> <p>Content 03</p> </div> </body> </html> otherwise great to receive more tests .. I would say http://tests.xproc.org/contact/ cheers, Jim Fuller On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Raymond Bissonnette <raybiss@formedia.ca> wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm a bit of a newbie with XProc and I just started looking at p:with-option > yesterday. The following pipeline might represent a simple test case. > > <p:pipeline> > <!-- use the default input source --> > <p:add-attribute match="//div[@class='section']" attribute-name="id" > > <p:with-option name="attribute-value" select="concat('section_', > position())"/> > </p:add-attribute> > </p:pipeline> > > With this source: > > <html> > <head> > <title>Topic 01</title> > </head> > <body> > <h1>Topic 01</h1> > <div class="section"> > <h2>T01 - Section 1</h2> > <p>Content 01</p> > </div> > <div class="section"> > <h2>T01 - Section 2</h2> > <p>Content 02</p> > </div> > <div class="section"> > <h2>T01 - Section 3</h2> > <p>Content 03</p> > </div> > </body> > </html> > > Expecting this result: > > <html> > <head> > <title>Topic 01</title> > </head> > <body> > <h1>Topic 01</h1> > <div class="section" id="section_1"> > <h2>T01 - Section 1</h2> > <p>Content 01</p> > </div> > <div class="section" id="section_2"> > <h2>T01 - Section 2</h2> > <p>Content 02</p> > </div> > <div class="section" id="section_3"> > <h2>T01 - Section 3</h2> > <p>Content 03</p> > </div> > </body> > </html> > > I'm not there yet but I understand the spec better every day. Thanks in > great part to this list. > > The above was inspired by looking at add-attribute-002.xml, so maybe it > could become add-attribute-003.xml. > > > Regards, > Raymond > > -----Original Message----- > From: xproc-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:xproc-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf > Of Toman_Vojtech@emc.com > Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 9:38 AM > To: xproc-dev@w3.org > Subject: RE: with-option and other XPath Expressions - Prevent streaming > from being possible (??) > > >> One interesting data point >> I looked at all the published "required" tests use of p:with-option >> Not a single one of them used a context sensitive expression >> (out of 42 >> p:with-option uses). >> Atleast not that I could find. > > By the way, there are a couple of recent tests that do this now: > base-uri-001.xml > base-uri-002.xml > preserve-base-uri-001.xml > > I agree, it may not be convincing at all, but at least have some tests > that use context sensitive p:with-option. And I am sure we will have > more (as a matter of fact, I am writing one myself at the moment :) > > Regards, > Vojtech > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 9 December 2008 08:30:02 UTC