Hello again,

Thank you, Wendell!

The proposed solutions leave me with two questions:


1) Is there a way to do what I originally had in mind, i.e., go forward 
to the first non-"foo" sibling and from there go backwards, taking all the
"foo" siblings up to the current node? Asked differently, can the 
following XPath expression be fixed?

following-sibling::*[not(self::source)][1]/preceding-sibling::*[self::source][preceding-sibling::current()]

Specifically, can "preceding-sibling::current()" be fixed?


2) Liam's and Wendell's proposals involve the expression [name()=...], 
whereas I have used [self:: ...]. Are these strictly equivalent, or is 
there a reason to prefer the one over the other?


Thanks again for your help!
Wolfhart


On 18-02-21 13:06, Wendell Piez wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With a sequence of variable declarations:
>
> <xsl:variable name="name" select="name()"/>
> <xsl:variable name="followers" 
> select="following-sibling::*[name()=$name]"/>
> <xsl:variable name="interlopers" 
> select="following-sibling::*[not(name()=$name)] | 
> following-sibling::*[not(name()=$name)]/following-sibling::*"/>
> <xsl:variable name="invited" select=". | 
> $followers[not(count(.|$interlopers)=count($interlopers))]"/>
>
> Note: untested.
>
> Good luck,
> Wendell
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 8:32 PM Wolfhart Totschnig 
> wolfhart.totschnig@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:wolfhart.totschnig@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
> <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> <mailto:xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     Dear list,
>
>     I am facing an XPath problem for which I cannot find the solution. I
>     want to select all following sibling elements of name "foo" up to the
>     first non-"foo" element. So, in the following case, the first two
>     <foo>
>     elements should be selected:
>
>     <foo/>
>     <foo/>
>     <bar/>
>     <foo/>
>
>     In the following case, all three <foo> elements should be selected:
>
>     <foo/>
>     <foo/>
>     <foo/>
>
>     And in the following case, nothing should be selected:
>
>     <bar/>
>     <foo/>
>     <foo/>
>
>     I came up with the following non-working approach:
>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  <xsl:choose>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  <xsl:when
>     test="not(following-sibling::*[not(self::foo)])">
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  <xsl:value-of select="following-sibling::*"/>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  </xsl:when>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  <xsl:otherwise>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  <xsl:value-of
>     select="following-sibling::*[not(self::source)][1]/preceding-sibling::*[self::source][preceding-sibling::current()]"/>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  B B B  </xsl:otherwise>
>     B B B B  B B B  B B B  </xsl:choose>
>
>     That is, test whether there are non-"foo" following siblings. If
>     there
>     are none, take all following siblings. If there are, go forward to
>     the
>     first non-"foo" sibling, and from there go backwards, taking all the
>     "foo" siblings up to the current node.
>
>     But this does not work. Apparently, the expression
>     "preceding-sibling::current()" is not a valid construct. So what
>     is the
>     correct way to do what I have in mind (or a simpler solution, if
>     there
>     is one). Please note that this stylesheet needs to be executed by
>     a web
>     browser, and so the solution has to remain within XPath 1.0.
>
>     Thanks in advance for your help!
>     Wolfhart
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ...Wendell Piez... ...wendell -at- nist -dot- gov...
> ...wendellpiez.com... ...pellucidliterature.org... ...pausepress.org...
> ...github.com/wendellpiez. <http://github.com/wendellpiez.>.. 
> ...gitlab.coko.foundation/wendell...
> XSL-List info and archive <http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list>
> EasyUnsubscribe <http://lists.mulberrytech.com/unsub/xsl-list/2652055> 
> (by email <>)