This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: Matching Attributes with @
- To: "'xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com'" <xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com>
- Subject: RE: Matching Attributes with @
- From: John Robert Gardner <jrgardn at emory dot edu>
- Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:42:06 -0400 (EDT)
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
On Fri, 26 May 2000, Kay Michael wrote:
> Confusion upon confusion!
>
> > On Fri, 26 May 2000, Paulo Gaspar wrote:
> > > >
> > > Each element node can have 2 basic types of descendent nodes:
> > > - Content;
> > > - Attributes.
>
> Paulo wrote wrong. Attributes are not descendents of the element they belong
> to, in the technical sense of the word.
> >
> > I remember a comment some time ago on this . . . that attributes are
> > descendents . . . wouldn't they be children? -- of their containing
> > element node, or context element node. So the element can
> > have attribute
> > children. ... So @ are children, but those children do not have parents?
>
> >
>
> Actually, you've come to exactly the opposite of the truth. An element is
> the parent of its attributes, but the attributes are not children of the
> element.
Thanks Michael. I couldn't make it work with what was written, so I
thought I should extend the logic and check with the list on it. Now that
I read it, it makes perfect sense. As I was writing, I couldn't make it
work in my head so thought I'd check.
Saadhu!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
John Robert Gardner, Ph.D.
XML Engineer
Emory University
------------------------------------------------------------
http://vedavid.org/diss/
"There is a difference between knowing The Path, and walking the Path."
-Lawrence Fishburn/Morpheus
>
> And if that seems absurd, just substitute some non-biological words like
> "controller" and "component" for "parent" and "child", and it doesn't seem
> so bad.
>
> Mike K
>
>
> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list