I have a table that is populated from a SQL database. Most of the data entered will have an ABN which I can use to look up email and name. Some data doesn’t have an ABN, and only has a UID. I don’t want to have to display the UID in the table since its unnecessary 98% of the time, so I want to use an xsl:when to change the name field to the UID if there isn’t a name.
Here is an example of the 2 cases in XML:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<CourseData>
<row batchid="0" courseid="10101" createdon="04/03/2012 01:08PM" datecompleted="1:08 PM" datecompletedDateValue="1333483680000" lastupdatebyabn="999999" lastupdatebyuid="tsmith" lastupdateon="04/03/2012 01:08PM" num="2" respondentabn="999999" respondentemail="tsmith@test.com" respondentid="1" respondentname="Thomas Smith" respondentuid="tsmith"/>
<row batchid="0" courseid="10101" createdon="04/03/2012 01:08PM" datecompleted="1:08 PM" datecompletedDateValue="1333483697000" lastupdatebyabn="" lastupdatebyuid="jsmith" lastupdateon="04/03/2012 01:08PM" num="3" respondentabn="" respondentemail="" respondentid="2" respondentname=" " respondentuid="jsmith"/>
</CourseData>
Here is the XSL I’m using, which obviously isn’t working.
<xsl:choose>
<xsl:when test="row[@respondentabn='']">
<label datafield="@respondentuid"></label>
</xsl:when>
<xsl:otherwise>
<label datafield="@respondentname"></label>
</xsl:otherwise></xsl:choose></td>
How can I fix this?
Edit: So after talking to my boss, he said for one I’d need an loop in there for this to work right, but that I really shouldn’t be doing this in the .xsl anyways. I modified my sql that is serving up the data to make that change for me, which in retrospect, I probably should have thought of in the first place.
You don’t give much indication of the stylesheet so it’s hard to be sure but I’d guess you have something like
or in any event if the current node is such that row[@respondentabn=”] does anything useful it must be the parent of row in which case
<label datafield="@respondentuid">would select attributes of the parent (even if the AVT syntax was corrected).So I would guess:
Or, more tersely