thank you for your answer. The problem is i'm actually passing a *Node* to the tag, not a Document. So I'd like to evaluate the XPath starting from that Node, not from the root of the Document the Node belongs to.
I also tried: <x:forEach select="$node"> <x:out select="@name"/> </x:forEach>
and it works. But it's kind of a hack. I'm not searching for a workaround, I need a clean solution since i'm working on a project that aims to simplify JSP development with the aid of the JSTL + plus a custom Servlet, and I cannot expect people to use this "forEach" hack.
flavio
Johnson, Chris wrote:
It seems that what 1.1 is doing is more correct.
How do you expect jstl to find your sub node without telling it how to get there? That's how it works in directories on a computer (unix or pc). The only way that I know of to go to a subnode without providing the full path is by using the // operator, like: select="$doc//subnode". Otherwise, the only way (that I know of) to "cd" to a subnode, and therefore not have to give the full path is by using x:forEach.
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Flavio Tordini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2004 9:37 AM
To: Tag Libraries Users List
Subject: Re: using Node variables with JSTL XML tags
hi all,
In the list archive, I found that the same question has been asked in June e never answered:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg07315.htm l
should I post to the dev mailing list? should I report a bug?
please someone answer!
flavio
Flavio Tordini wrote:
hi all, I'm experimenting with the JSTL XML tags. I have a org.w3c.dom.Node variable and I'm trying to use the JSTL with it. Something like:
<x:out select="$node/@name"/>
The odd thing is that the XPath expression is evaluated relative the document root, not to the specified node. The following works:
<x:out select="$node/full/path/to/node/@name"/>
I cannot find an explanation in the JSTL 1.1 spec. The only thing I found is in section 11.1.3:
"An XPath expression must also treat variables that resolve to implementations of standard DOM interfaces as representing nodes of
the
type bound to that interface by the DOM specification."
Is this behaviour by design? Is it compliant with the spec?
Thank you in advance, flavio
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
