• To: "Richard Tobin" <richard@c...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: XPath brain teaser
• From: "Bob Foster" <bob@o...>
• Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 20:26:24 -0500
• References: <200308270056.BAA19379@s...>

From: "Richard Tobin" <richard@c...>
> >This is easier to understand if you think of it in terms of set
construction
> >and iterators. The two expressions with abbreviations eliminated are:
> >
> >/descendant-or-self::node()/para[1]
> >/descendant::para[1]
>
> You might ask why // means the first of these, rather than the more
> obvious second.  The answer (I think) is precisely so that expressions
> like //para[1] will mean what they do; it's more common to want to
> treat the first paragraph in each section specially than the first
> paragraph in the while document.

Sure. I can understand defining the abbreviated expression so it is more
useful. And I agree with your original point that the result is
counter-intuitive, because the intermediate set is not visible in the
expression. Just a bit of arcana that has to be memorized, I guess.

Bob Foster

• References:
  • Re: XPath brain teaser
    • From: Richard Tobin <richard@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approach to glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Next by Date: Re: XML CMM and ISO9000 compliance? - was A standard approachto glueing together reusableXML fragments in prose?
• Previous by thread: Re: XPath brain teaser
• Next by thread: Re: XPath brain teaser
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread