Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnold Hendriks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Buchcik, Kasimier wrote: > > >Can you provide the XPath expression which are in use? > >You write "the correct node and a handful of nodes". Do you > >use expressions with positional predicates (e.g. "[1]")? > > > > > Yes. All of the expressions have a form such as: > //p:pages/p:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:id="main"]/p:*[9]/p:*[1]/p:* > > (I execute an xpath, and then recurse with a deeper xpath. I > know this > isn't the most efficient way of running through a DOM, but I'm > delivering the nodes to a language binding which doesn't understand > pointers and just starts new xpaths with an ever deeper path) > > >If yes, then the source of the error should be one of the > >optimizations, which were added in 2.6.26. > >I'll look into this, but if you could post the expressions, > >then this would be easier. > > > > > All expressions start with //p:pages/p:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:id="main"], > followed by > one or more /p:*[xxx] and finally a /p:* expression. I can You meant "p:*[xxx]", right? A "/p:*[xxx]" would start from the document node. > put .26 back > in and grab a few more failing expressions, but they all boil down to > that basic form. I couldn't reproduce your scenario yet. Maybe the behaviour you describe shows up with a specific structure of the tree. Could you provide a target XML document? At which step do the additional nodes show up in the result? At "p:*[n]" or only at the last "p:*" step, or both? Regards, Kasimier _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
