RE: Grand Unification Theory (XSL/XPointer)

Subject: RE: Grand Unification Theory (XSL/XPointer)
From: Nantapon Chaimunkong <b38npc@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 16:11:53 +0700 (GMT)

On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Didier PH Martin wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> <Comment>
> > A) first goal: see if both name space contexts could be expressed with the
> > same delimitation convention (i.e uses "/")
> Agree.
> 
> > b) second goal: integrate instance reference to class reference with the
> > addition of indexes.
> How can we index element1//element2? The easiest way is to index in
> document order which no longer show its structure.
> </Comment>
> 
> <reply>
> Sorry, I didn't understood your point. Can you explain a bit more? Why are
> you using the following notation "element1//element2"

Given XSL Pattern "element1//element2", I wondered how I could index it.
If I used "element1//element2(1)", It would not show the real position of
element2. I have reread the XPointer WD and found that // corresponds 
to descendant which also use document order. So it won't be problem,
anymore. :P

So it is great idea to unify XSL Pattern and XPointer. If XSL Select
Pattern is subset of XPointer and we can describe match pattern using
select pattern, we can adopt XPointer.

> 
> Here is a model of the hierarchy I was referring to:
> 
> <element1> element 1 data </element1>
>   <element2> element2 data instance 1 </element2>
>   <element2> element 2 data instance 2 </element2>
> 
> I tried to include the XPOinter index notation but with "/" instead. So,
> "element1/element2(1)" was referring to the first instance of element2.
> 
> But it seems that you noticed a bug, can you be more explicit so that I can
> understand your point. I want to be sure I understand you well.
> </reply>
> 
> regards
> Didier PH Martin
> mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.netfolder.com
> 
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread