Subject: Re: [xsl] position last and attributes From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 08:45:27 -0400 |
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 20/09/2012 07:13, Ihe Onwuka wrote: >> >> It would seem (somewhat paradoxically) that given the definition of >> position() and last() they could be applied to @* which is >> intrinsically unordered. >> > > Actually, there is a total ordering relation (document order) over all > nodes. It's just that for two attributes of the same element (and indeed, > say, for two elements in different documents) the ordering relation is > implementation-dependent. So it's not correct to say that they are > "intrinsically unordered". They are ordered, but not in a predictable way. >
Then to me, they are not ordered irrespective of what the implementation does.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-infoset-20040204/#omitted Appendix D: What is not in the Information Set (normative) The following information is not represented in the current version of the XML Information Set (this list is not intended to be exhaustive): ... 10.The order of attributes within a start-tag.
-- Contact us for world-wide XML consulting and instructor-led training Free 5-hour lecture: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/links/udemy.htm Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/ G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Google+ profile: https://plus.google.com/116832879756988317389/about Legal business disclaimers: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Ihe Onwuka | Thread | Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Andrew Welch |
Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Ihe Onwuka | Date | Re: [xsl] position last and attribu, Andrew Welch |
Month |