Subject: RE: [xsl] Can sets have order? From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 18:38:23 -0000 |
> Well, no. Two sections confuse me: > > 1: "An axis identifies an (ordered) list of nodes. The predicate > associated with the axis is applied to the ordered list." > > I would have thought that the following would make more sense, because > it seems wierd to throw away an ordering that is never seen: > > "An axis identifies an (ordered) list of nodes. The predicate > associated with the axis is applied to the *unordered set*." I'm not arguing about what "makes sense", I'm telling you what the XPath spec says. > > "The node-set is unordered, but > the nodes have an ordering, called document order." > > It is confusing to say that node-sets are unordered, whilst nodes are. I find it reasonable. If I have two sets {4, 6, 7} and {5, 6, 4} then 4<6 is a property of the numbers 4 and 6, not a property of the set they happen to be part of today. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Mike Moran | Thread | Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] Performance problem on Or, Steve Muench |
Month |