Subject: Re: [xsl] Can sets have order? From: Oliver Becker <obecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 18:22:05 +0100 (MET) |
> > This property follows from the fact that the body of the relation is > > a mathematical set; sets in mathematics are not ordered." > > That (and private mail I've received) does it. The pure mathematician (David) > wins that point. In pure math, sets seem strictly not to have order. > > > This is a rather significant point in his discussion. > > Perhaps, but rather useless in the discussion that prompted the matter. We know that ancestor::*[1] and (ancestor::*)[1] evaluates to different nodes if there is more than 1 ancestor. Do you think it would be reasonable to assume, ancestor::* has some intrinsic order? Would it help understanding XSLT? I don't think so. Cheers, Oliver /-------------------------------------------------------------------\ | ob|do Dipl.Inf. Oliver Becker | | --+-- E-Mail: obecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | | op|qo WWW: http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~obecker | \-------------------------------------------------------------------/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] XSLT newbie cheat sheet, cutlass | Thread | Re[2]: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Steven . C . Kienle |
Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Mike Moran | Date | Re: [xsl] xsl reorder, Goetz Bock |
Month |