This appears to be working:

               <xsl:apply-templates select="node()[not(self::processing-
instruction()[not(following-sibling::*)])]"/>

Then I insert the extra element.  Then grab the PIs I suppressed above:
               <xsl:apply-templates select="node()[self::processing-
instruction()[not(following-sibling::*)]]"/>

Does it look right?

Thanks.
--emily

----- Original Message -----
From: <egarrett@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 2:21 pm
Subject: Re: [xsl] targeting the last element in a node or consecutive 
elements
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Here is my logic so far to target everything in the node, and if 
> it is 
> a processing-instruction it should be processed only if something 
> exists after it other than another processing-instruction.  What I 
> have 
> below does not work because I think it is looking for the second 
> processing-instruction inside the first one rather than following 
> it, 
> but it is starting to feel like it is possible to put what I need 
> in 
> one instruction.
> 
> <xsl:apply-templates select="node()[not(self::processing-instruction()
> [not(following::*[not(self::processing-instruction())])])]"/>
> 
> Warning: on line 58 of file:/C:/Documents%20and%
> 20Settings/egarrett/Desktop/Transforms%20R%20Us/saxon/xsl/X3B.xsl:
>  The self axis will never select any element() nodes when 
> starting at 
> an
>  processing-instruction() node
> 
> Any ideas?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: egarrett@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 9:59 am
> Subject: Re: [xsl] targeting the last element in a node or 
> consecutive 
> elements
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> > Yes, your example is correct.  I don't know if or how many PIs 
> > will 
> > occur at the end of the node.
> > 
> > P.S. I started a new post because they changed the 
> > requirements....   
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Abel Braaksma <abel.online@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Thursday, January 4, 2007 9:53 am
> > Subject: Re: [xsl] targeting the last element in a node or 
> > consecutive 
> > elements
> > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 
> > > Hi Emily,
> > > 
> > > This is a double post, you already opened this discussion 
> under 
> > > "suppressing only the last PI" (which differed in details, 
> however).> > 
> > > If I may, it appears that you want to do this:
> > > 
> > > <somenode>
> > >    <node1 />
> > >    <?instr1?>
> > >    <node2 />
> > >    <?instr2?>
> > >    <?instr3?>
> > > </somenode>
> > > 
> > > 1. Process node1, instr1, node2 etc
> > > 2. Do something before instr2 and instr3 (being consecutively 
> > and 
> > > together at the end of a node)
> > > 3. Process instr2 and instr3
> > > (if instr2 and instr3 were not there, you want to skip 
> > processing 
> > > step 2 
> > > and 3?)
> > > 
> > > Am i right? Please confirm (and/or give your sample input, to 
> > make 
> > > the 
> > > subject easier)
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > -- Abel
> > > 
> > > Emily.Garrett@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to use xsl:apply templates to grab the entire 
> > content 
> > > of a
> > > > node, except for any PIs that may be at the very end of the 
> > > node.  I can
> > > > see how position()=last() can be used to refer to the very 
> > last 
> > > PI, but
> > > > how would I refer to possibly 2 or 3 PIs that are at the end 
> > of 
> > > the node
> > > > (not knowing what they are or how many), but still process 
> PIs 
> > > that are
> > > > contained elsewhere in this content?   Is there some syntax 
> > that 
> > > refers> to consecutive elements or refers to an element that 
> is 
> > > the last one in
> > > > a node, not knowing what element it is?
> > > >
> > > > Here is explanation for what I'm trying to do:   
> > > >
> > > > Process all content, unless they are PIs that occur 
> > > consecutively at the
> > > > very end of the node.
> > > >
> > > > Then I have to insert an element, then process these PIs 
> that 
> > occur> > consecutively at the very end of the node.
> > > >
> > > > I'm having trouble narrowing down my research on this one.  
> > Does 
> > > anyone> have any ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Emily