Altova Mailing List Archives>Archive Index >comp.text.xml Archive Home >Recent entries >Thread Prev - Re: XPath filters equivalence >Thread Next - Re: XPath filters equivalence Re: XPath filters equivalenceTo: NULL Date: 10/6/2007 4:37:00 AM Hi Joe, > Depends on the predicate. If p2 or p3 tests position() or last(), _NO_ > -- the latter form would test position in the original set, while the > former would test position in the set that has gotten past the > preceeding filter(s). p1, p2, and p3 are simple paths that only have ., /, //, and * like ./a/b//c/d//* or //a/b//c//* > In these examples: no, since an absolute XPath by definition ignores its > context and since if it fails in any of these the result is that we find > no nodes. (Though for performance reasons in typical processors, you > will probably want to test it earlier rather than later). > In more complicated XPaths, maybe. Other than performance difference, if my predicates are also simple predicates like the case above, so I think they all return the same result, is this correct? Regards, Al | ||||||
| Company | Legal | Press | Partners | Careers | Sitemap | Contact Us | Altova Blog | Mobile | Full Site | |||
|
