Nick, how about the XPath:
or the shortcut for this:
Nick, Yes, we can confirm that is what the DDR really says. I take your word on the documentation PDF and the Rect and Line.
Small typo...when you say...
...you likely mean...
Beverly's code (allowing after the typo fix) looks promising.
ok. then this XPath:
= descendant-or-self "Styles" of the ancestor "Object"
... should work even if there is nothing between Object and Styles.
On Sep 16, 2015, at 5:22 PM, TonyWhite <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
Thanks for picking up the typo, yes the paths you suggest are right.
Yep, I'm doing something similar using child::* just because I like having it appear explicit instead of // which I'd probably notice in 6 months time and think it was a typo and fix .
But the bug report is still valid, the docs or the DDR need to be clarified and I think the best way would be for the DDR to change to what the docs suggest.
Nick, agreed! that's why I would prefer the
as it makes it plain what we are wanting ( a child, grandchild or ....)
The // does seem like a typo, doesn't it?
The grammar docs are not a true DTD or XSD, so I use it more of a 'guide' and the rely on what actually gets created by the DDR. But I would like to know more about what's true.
nickorr (et al):
Thank you for your posts.
I have sent the entire thread to our Development, Testing and Product Documentation departments for review. When I receive any feedback, I will let you know.
Thanks, I missed your reply there. The issue isn't the XPath, I can make that work, and had already done so, I'd just noticed that the documentation doesn't match the actual output.
If the simplest solution is to update the documentation, that's fine, as my code will have to work with all previous versions as well as any future ones that change the location.