Subject: Re: [xsl] position last and attributes From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 09:31:47 +0100 |
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 20 September 2012 08:51, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> thats the genus of the paradox I was referring to. > > This is my point and the key bit to get :) > > The fact the order of attributes cannot be guaranteed has nothing to > do with position() and last(), as by the time those functions get to > be used the order of the node list is known. > My initial post (if you read it again) was to highlight the paradox of being able to apply ordering semantics to something that is intrinsically unordered. By contrast what are/would be (who knows what weird implementations are out there) the semantics of corresponding constructs within the context of SQL (absent an order by clause).
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Andrew Welch | Thread | Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Andrew Welch |
Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Andrew Welch | Date | Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Andrew Welch |
Month |