This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: Grouping and Sorting on value inside group
- From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter dot Hunsberger at stjude dot org>
- To: "'xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com'" <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 11:16:39 -0500
- Subject: RE: [xsl] Grouping and Sorting on value inside group
- Reply-to: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> It's not the key() function that's reducing it to a single node, it's the
> generate-id() function you are running on the nodes returned by key(). .4]
[snip]
> Beyond this I think Tom S. explained it.
Yes, what I meant was that perhaps I should be a little more explicit in
what I'm passing into the key function when I generate the keys. However,
I find that I actually do understand what's going on now, although my
understanding on how to get keys to always return the results I expect
remains a little foggy (more experimentation needed).
>But I'm confused not having the examples in front of me. Would you be able
>to snip them out (again) and recapitulate the question if I'm not getting
>what you're asking?
At this point I don't think its worth you spending more time on it. I just
made one other reply a bit ago that may help explain the bit you where
"missing". It does have some open questions that I could use some opinions
on, but I'm pretty much ok with the way the grouping is currently working.
The exception is the open question on why I can't get the key to replace
the //dataset reference to work. That's what I'll play with over the next
couple of days. I may end up posting back to the list again, but I'm
starting to suspect there's a way to restructure the whole set of templates
to deal with the data with a different line of attack that may make the
whole issue go away...
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list