Re: [xsl] Numeric top-level predicates in patterns

[David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/04/2014 18:05, Abel Braaksma (Exselt) wrote:


> > "Sibling numerical predicate" isn't one of your defined terms. I
> > assume you mean a predicate of [1] preceded by another numerical
> > predicate.


> I thought it would be clear from the definitions of sibling
> predicates and numerical predicates. But indeed, I meant a numerical
> predicate that is also a sibling predicate, that has the effective
> static numeric value of 1 (the integer, not the string), such like

That is why I think Michael defined it as he did. [1] is only redundant 
if the preceding sequence is known to be at most 1.

So [1] is a numerical predicate and a sibling predicate in

$foo[true()][1]

but it is not redundant.


David