Subject: Re: [xsl] A Question **TO** XSLT Newbies From: Peter Flynn <peter@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 22 Apr 2003 22:37:40 +0100 |
On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 03:45, S Woodside wrote: > On Monday, April 21, 2003, at 07:45 PM, Peter Flynn wrote: > > > It's important not to forget that Document people had been dealing > > with this stuff for over a decade before XML. > > Does the XPath syntax predate XML? It's actually XPointer that inherited some of the TEI Extended Pointer Notation, but the concept of using a formatted string to address a fragment of a document was well established (eg in HyTime) by the time XML arrived. > > Only for the default case, where elements are presented for > > processing in document order (and I don't see how else it could > > be written...). Anything else it's XSLT (or rather, the programmer) > > which is in charge. > > Would you say that the default case is also "usually" (or at least for > teaching purposes) also the "best" way? (modulo all the usual > disclaimers) For "document" XML, probably. Traditional text documents tend to be read sequentially. For "data" applications there probably is no "right" order, but most data documents [sic] I have seen tend to be modelled on a top-down basis, so they bear a resemblance to the way the same data would have been laid out for human reading. ///Peter XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] A Question **TO** XSLT Ne, S Woodside | Thread | Re: [xsl] A Question **TO** XSLT Ne, Deborah Aleyne Lapey |
RE: [xsl] Grouping problem?, Conal Tuohy | Date | RE: [xsl] Re: Grouping problem?, Lars Huttar |
Month |