On 01/10/2009, Silvester Pozarnik <[email protected]> wrote: > sebb skrev: > > > On 22/09/2009, Barnabas Davoti <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Noel O'Brien wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why not use the following XPath extractor instead: > > > > //sele...@name="A"]/option/@value > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's a good news... I was wondering why should we use regular > expressions > > > for extracting data from an XML document... of course as far as it's XML > > > (XHTML), but anyway in this case it's proper XML. > > > > > > I guess xpath is not an option if the page is html (so not XML but > SGML) or > > > the document is not well-formed XML. > > > > > > > > > > I don't think it's possible to do it with a single RE. > > > > However, one can use the RE extractor to extract the specific set of > > options into a variable, and then use the __regexFunction() to split > > the variable. But XPath is simpler. > > > > It might be useful to enhance the RE extractor to operate on a subset > > of the body... > > > > > > > Jepp, XPath may work, but I am still interested in a template for looping > thought the results of __regexFunction() as a second level looping because > HTML codes are often not balanced, especially in tables.
Which is where Tidy comes in handy. > BR > Silvester Pozarnik > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
