Subject: [xsl] Re: Re: Re: Re: An issue with XPath 2.0 sequences (Was Re: RE: Muenchian method, and keys 'n stuff) From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:32:39 -0800 (PST) |
> > That's very dangerous. It means that if one were doing several different > > mapping operations from the same sequence the results could might be > > incorrectly aligned. > > As things stand they will usually not be aligned, the sequence > resulting from running "for" over an input sequence is the flattened > concatenation of the sequences resulting from applying the body to > each item of the original sequence, so you have no indication of > which result item resulted from which input. If you need this (and I > would have thought that you normally would) then you have to ensure > that the body of the for constructs an element node around each > result so that you get a predicatble sequence back. But then you have > a sequence of nodes rather than a sequence of whatever type you > originally wanted.... > > I think that this is just going to lead to massive user confusion. > > David And as Mike recently mentioned, creating elements is an expensive operation. Dimitre. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Re: RE: Re: Re: An issue , Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] Re: RE: Re: Re: An issue with, Dimitre Novatchev |
RE: [xsl] Re: Re: An issue with XPa, Michael Kay | Date | [xsl] How to invoke java instance m, Brad Cox |
Month |