Re: XPATH evaluation
От
Nicolas Barbier
Тема
Re: XPATH evaluation
Дата
Msg-id
BANLkTikMmW6Ef71jtooVQJWGDXtbVnmM0w@mail.gmail.com
Ответ на
Re: XPATH evaluation (Andrew Dunstan)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
XPATH evaluation Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
Re: XPATH evaluation Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>
Re: XPATH evaluation Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
Re: XPATH evaluation Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: XPATH evaluation Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
Re: XPATH evaluation Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: XPATH evaluation Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
Re: XPATH evaluation Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>
Re: XPATH evaluation Nicolas Barbier <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com>
Re: XPATH evaluation Radosław Smogura <rsmogura@softperience.eu>
Re: XPATH evaluation Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: XPATH evaluation Nicolas Barbier <nicolas.barbier@gmail.com>
2011/6/17, Andrew Dunstan : > On 06/17/2011 11:29 AM, Nicolas Barbier wrote: > >> CDATA sections are just syntactic sugar (a form of escaping): > > Yeah. OTOH doesn't an empty CDATA section force a child element, where a > pure empty element does not? Wow, some Googling around shows that there is much confusion about this. I thought that it was obvious that adding shouldn't change the content at all, but quite a few people seem to disagree :-/. Nicolas -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion. Q. Why is top posting bad?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления
