Subject: RE: [xsl] Unordered sequences in XPath 2.0 From: Mukul Gandhi <mukul_gandhi@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 02:31:37 -0700 (PDT) |
Thanks Mike and David.. Regards, Mukul --- Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Bob's article has miscopied the relevant text from > the spec. If you follow > the link to the text it is quoting, you will read: > > [Definition: A sequence is an ordered collection of > zero or more items.] > > Michael Kay > http://www.saxonica.com/ > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mukul Gandhi [mailto:mukul_gandhi@xxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: 04 July 2005 09:55 > > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: [xsl] Unordered sequences in XPath 2.0 > > > > I am reading this article - > > http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2005/02/02/xpath2.html > > > > It says.. > > "A sequence is an unordered collection of zero or > more > > items." > > (Please note the word unordered). > > > > Then it says, "An XPath expression describes a set > of > > nodes, the value of that XPath expression is a > > sequence". > > > > This means, that the sequence representation of > XPath > > 2.0 expression will be unordered.. Is this true? I > > think, this was not the case with XPath 1.0? > > > > Regards, > > Mukul > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________ > > > Yahoo! Sports > > Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy > Football > > http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Numbers containing 'e+..', Drew McLellan | Thread | RE: [xsl] Problem with generating U, Andrew Welch |
RE: [xsl] Unordered sequences in XP, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] Problem with generating U, David Carlisle |
Month |