Subject: Re: process order (still...) From: Mike Brown <mike@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 11:38:50 -0600 (MDT) |
I wrote: > > But... why? What is the point of leaving attribute order > > up to the parser? David Carlisle wrote: > Because attributes have no inherent order. I'm asking why do they have no inherent order. "Because the implementation might be some wacky hash table" is a circular argument. But you did almost satisfy my curiosity with this point: > consider attribute defaulting from a DTD. If the DTD supplies an > attribute a parser will add it, but nothing in the XML spec says whether > the attribute should be first or last or in alphabeic order > [...] when that is exposed as the input > tree to XSL you will see different results on different systems. It still seems a bit arbitrary that certain types of nodes simply don't have an inherent order. If order can be imposed on elements, text, comments and processing-instructions... > Surely you don't expect me to read the spec! I just learn XSL by > answering questions on this list, then waiting for people to correct me. Touché! > (In that case I think `processed in document order' has to mean > `processed in any order at all, but results added to output tree in > document order, otherwise something is wrong with the world) Agreed. See my reply to Michael Kay for more on this. - Mike ___________________________________________________________ Mike J. Brown, software engineer, Webb Interactive Services XML/XSL stuff: http://www.skew.org/ http://www.webb.net/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: process order (still...), David Carlisle | Thread | No side effects holy cow. ( Re: pro, Paul Tchistopolskii |
RE: RE: Attribute test problem solv, Medina, Edward | Date | RE: dynamically setting 'selected' , Michael Chu |
Month |