问题
<root>
<Entry>
<ID>1</ID>
<Details>
<Code>A1</Code>
<Value>1000</Value>
</Details>
</Entry>
<Entry>
<ID>2</ID>
<Details>
<Code>A2</Code>
<Value>2000</Value>
</Details>
</Entry>
<Entry>
<ID>3</ID>
<Details>
<Code>B1</Code>
<Value>3000</Value>
</Details>
</Entry>
<Entry>
<ID>4</ID>
<Details>
<Code>B2</Code>
<Value>4000</Value>
</Details>
</Entry>
</root>
I have this input XML which I am looking to group via XSLT wherein the grouping happens by hardcoding node values. Let me explain that in detail:
The grouping needs to happen based on the Code parameter appearing in the node <Code>
as follows:
- Codes 'A1' and 'A2' needs to be grouped together
- Codes 'B1' and 'B2' needs to be grouped together
I am eventually summing the values coming out of <Value>
nodes in these groups. So the Output would be as follows:
<Output>
<Code-group> A </Code-group>
<Sum> 3000 </Sum>
<Code-group> B </Code-group>
<Sum> 7000 </Sum>
</Output>
For this requirement there needs to be hardcoding of the grouping values (to group A1,A2 as A and B1, B2 as B). I am using the word 'hardcoded' because the Codes (A1,A2,B1,B2) can come in any order so I want to rather hardcode the values to look for grouping than looking for Node indices.
I looked at for-each-group method as well as the Muenchian Grouping method but wasn't able to achieve the above group mapping. Any help appreciated!
Thanks in advance
EDIT: The mapping A1,A2 --> A & B1,B2 --> B is a generic example, the actual node values are entirely different than this, so a substring solution wouldn't work. That is why I was focusing on hardcoding to achieve that mapping.
回答1:
The hardcoding requirement is difficult to understand. Perhaps you want to do something like:
XSLT 2.0
<xsl:stylesheet version="2.0"
xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform">
<xsl:output method="xml" version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" indent="yes"/>
<xsl:key name="entry" match="Entry" use="Details/Code"/>
<xsl:template match="/root">
<Output>
<Code-group> A </Code-group>
<Sum>
<xsl:value-of select="sum(key('entry', ('A1', 'A2'))/Details/Value)" />
</Sum>
<Code-group> B </Code-group>
<Sum>
<xsl:value-of select="sum(key('entry', ('B1', 'B2'))/Details/Value)" />
</Sum>
</Output>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
回答2:
If you have the option of using for-each-group, I'd definitely use that over Muenchian grouping...
<xsl:stylesheet version="2.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform">
<xsl:output indent="yes"/>
<xsl:strip-space elements="*"/>
<xsl:template match="/*">
<Output>
<xsl:for-each-group select="Entry" group-by="substring(Details/Code,1,1)">
<Code-group>
<xsl:value-of select="current-grouping-key()"/>
</Code-group>
<Sum>
<xsl:value-of select="sum(current-group()/Details/Value)"/>
</Sum>
</xsl:for-each-group>
</Output>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
Fiddle: http://xsltfiddle.liberty-development.net/jxNakzX
If you truly want to hard code the "A" -> A1, A2 and "B" -> B1, B2 mapping, you could use xsl:key and not group at all...
<xsl:stylesheet version="2.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform">
<xsl:output indent="yes"/>
<xsl:strip-space elements="*"/>
<xsl:key name="A" match="Entry[Details/Code=('A1','A2')]" use="'A'"/>
<xsl:key name="B" match="Entry[Details/Code=('B1','B2')]" use="'B'"/>
<xsl:template match="/*">
<xsl:variable name="ctx" select="."/>
<Output>
<xsl:for-each select="('A','B')">
<xsl:variable name="key" select="."/>
<Code-group>
<xsl:value-of select="$key"/>
</Code-group>
<Sum>
<xsl:value-of select="sum($ctx/key($key,$key)/Details/Value)"/>
</Sum>
</xsl:for-each>
</Output>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
Fiddle: http://xsltfiddle.liberty-development.net/jxNakzX/1
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64321960/grouping-nodes-by-hardcoding-node-values-in-xslt