Subject: RE: XSLT/XPATH jargon
From: "Pawson, David" <DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 08:36:42 -0000
John E. Simpson  wrote:
>All I meant was that the definition should point out that 
>document order is 
>independent of the l-to-r/r-to-l/top-to-bottom/bottom-to-top 
>convention for 
>the language in which the document is written... and/or drop the word 
>"normally"... or provide an example in which the doc order is 
>NOT top down, 
>I don't know; maybe this is a case of over-exactitude at the 
>expense of 

Clarity was the intent. I'm guessing the audience is more likely
to be a new user than a Mike Kay :-)

regards, DaveP

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread