Subject: RE: [xsl] Can sets have order? From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 17:54:09 -0000 |
> Isn't it a bit confusing to say that it returns it in reverse document > order? My understanding is that ancestor:: is ordered most immediate > first i.e direct parent, then parent of parent and so on, all > the way up to the root. An axis identifies an (ordered) list of nodes. The predicate associated with the axis is applied to the ordered list. The result of an XPath expression, however, is always a node-set, not a list. The node-set is unordered, but the nodes have an ordering, called document order. Many operations on node-sets process the nodes in document order. Is that clear now? 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?, Mike Moran |
Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, David Carlisle | Date | Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Uche Ogbuji |
Month |