Ah, that makes sense.
I'm still confused as to why Solr 1.4 would let that go, then.
Thanks!
-- Chris
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Jaeger, Jay - DOT
wrote:
> I am not an XSLT expert, but believe that in XSLT, "not" is a function,
> rather than an operator.
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpat
I am not an XSLT expert, but believe that in XSLT, "not" is a function, rather
than an operator.
http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#func-not
So, not(contains)) rather than not contains() should presumably do
the trick.
-Original Message-
From: Christopher Gross [mailto:cog
