Re: [xsl] question about identity transform

[Abel Braaksma <abel.online@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
> I think this has been discussed quite often in this list and should
> probably be well-reflected in the FAQ.
>
> A node-set is a set.
>
> A set, by definition, is unordered.

Indeed. And I know of the theory. But I find myself every now and then 
back on slippery ground, especially when it comes to explaining 
something of what I remember to have had difficulties with in the past, 
now finding myself making the same mistakes again. And on the same every 
now and then, when I am coding my stylesheet crafting new xpaths, it so 
often looks like it works one way ( A | B) but not the other way ( B | A 
), eventually finding out that there's a glitch in the expression making 
it so (and I never seem to learn: keep those expressions less than a 
couple of lines in size!). Just being a human being, it keeps being 
hard, even after some time of xslt programming, unraveling the mixture 
of ordered XML with unordered (well, partially) XSLT, resulting, in - 
hey - an ordered result set.

But, I must admit, it's a joy to mind and brains to do it, and any XSLT 
stylesheet (esp. 2.0), once finished, sure looks like a piece of art 
when you do it well ;-)

(Bill, sorry for being off-topic)

Cheers,
-- Abel