XPath Expression trouble

[m0wax]

I have the following bit of xhtml.

Code:

<td align="Right" class="grid"><i>One Dollars</i><br />
<a class="grid" href="http://www.orange.com">Orange</a><br />
<font class="detail">Fresh Oranges from the Florida </font></td>
<td align="Right" class="grid"><i>Two Dollars</i><br />
<a class="grid" href="http://www.banana.com">Banana</a><br />
<font class="detail">Fresh Bananas from the Dominican Republic</font></td>



I want to extract the price of the banana (two dollars) from it. Of
course there are many other fruits in this xhtml so the it has to
reference the Banana to get its specific price. I thought this would
involve something like this

Code:

<xsl:template match="htm:a[text()='Banana']/htmrevious-sibling">
<xsl:value-of select="."/>;
</xsl:template>

<xsl:template match="text()"/>



But this doesn't compile. Can anyone help?


Thanks

 

[Richard Tobin]

<xsl:template match="htm:a[text()='Banana']/htmrevious-sibling">
<xsl:value-of select="."/>;
</xsl:template>

That's completely confused!

You want something like

<xsl:template match="htm:a[text()='Banana']">
<xsl:value-of select="preceding-sibling::htm:i[1]"/>
</xsl:template>

-- Richard

 

[Lars Kellogg-Stedman]

You want something like

<xsl:template match="htm:a[text()='Banana']">
<xsl:value-of select="preceding-sibling::htm:i[1]"/>
</xsl:template>

Or less graceful but still functional:

<xsl:template match="td[child::a[text() = 'Banana']]/i">
<xsl:value-of select="text()"/>
</xsl:template>

-- Lars

 

[Johannes Koch]

Or less graceful but still functional:

<xsl:template match="td[child::a[text() = 'Banana']]/i">
<xsl:value-of select="text()"/>
</xsl:template>

Not in a namespace-aware context.

 

[Lars Kellogg-Stedman]

Not in a namespace-aware context.

Do you mean that even if you were to qualify the element names it would
still be invalid, or are you just being pedantic because in my example they
weren't?

-- Lars

 

[Johannes Koch]

Do you mean that even if you were to qualify the element names it would
still be invalid, or are you just being pedantic because in my example they
weren't?

The second.