RE: [xsl] XSL Previous Node

Subject: RE: [xsl] XSL Previous Node
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 09:07:26 -0000
> So is there a historical reason for having preceding/following instead
> of one of the following: preceding/proceeding, preceding/postceding,
> previous/following?

Well, postceding isn't an English word, and proceeding means something quite
different, so the only other candidate here is previous.

I grew up with Codasyl which used next/prior.

Standards committees do sometimes spend time debating such issues but when
it's a choice between two words that will do equally well, there's no way of
telling why one was preferred. Perhaps, if it was considered at all, people
might have argued that "previous" can only have a temporal meaning, whereas
"preceding" and "following" can refer to any sequence, spatial, temporal,
causal, etc.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/



> 
> I hope there isn't too trivial of a question.  It is just one of those
> things that has been sitting in the back of my mind these few days
> that the list brought up again.
> 
> Jonathan Gorman
> 
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 17:32:28 GMT, David Carlisle 
> <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Is previous axes part of XSLT/XPath 2.0?
> > 
> > yes
> > 
> > >  What if I am stuck with XSLT/XPath 1.0 for now?
> > 
> > It was part (of XPath 1 as well.
> > 
> > Except of course that I can only spell when reading 
> messages not when
> > typing them, the axis (in xpath 1 and 2) is preceding:: not 
> previous::
> > sorry about that.
> > 
> > David
> > 
> > 
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> > This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
> > service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on 
> a proactive
> > anti-virus service working around the clock, around the 
> globe, visit:
> > http://www.star.net.uk
> > 
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________

Current Thread