Subject: RE: RE: [xsl] XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 Functions and Operators Version 1.0 From: "ura" <ura@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 22:27:20 +0400 |
> The basic idea of having sequences in the data model rather than sets is > that the result of sorting a node-set can be assigned to a variable, > something which isn't possible in XSLT 1.0. There are then mechanisms for > iterating over a sequence or indexing into it. It isn't clear enough why people always needed to do sorting before it needed. What if the new attribute (aka "sort-by") in the variable would be somehow better (possibly?). <xsl:variable name="country" sortby="name"> <x><y><xsl:copy-of select="document('c.xml')" /></y> <y><xsl:copy-of select="document('d.xml')" /></y></x> </xsl:variable> === *.xml === <doc> <city name="Munchen" /> <city name="Berlin" /> </doc> Might be, the "ready-to-use sorted sets" aren't worse then "sorted sequences"? It's interesting to know about the possible motivations against such model (implementation?) Though, they were only thoughts, not more. Taler Andy XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 , Mulberry Technologie | Thread | [xsl] "Or" in XPATH expression at l, Miller, Sam |
[xsl] Node's content modification, Auguste Oumar | Date | [xsl] how to omit new lines, Dmitri Ilyin |
Month |