Re: Sibling text() Content Match [was: Re: expression value not anode set on content match]

[David Carlisle <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>]

> If I'm right, using text() would have alleviated some of the
> redundancy/lack of specificity that David pointed out in my solution, yes?

nope, if you change . to text() in your solution it won't work at all as
then you'll only be testing for character data of the record element
not any of its children or grandchildren but looking at your example
record doesn't have any character data (except white space nodes between
data-field elements)

Using = with contains isn't really redundant it's just weird.

David


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list