Subject: Re: [xsl] Can sets have order? From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 11:11:03 -0700 |
> > > The pure mathematician (David) wins that point. > > OK if you turn up in Oxford, I'll buy you a beer:-) > > > The reason I objected to David's going on about sets not having order is that > > he seemed to be claiming that node sets do not have order. > > I didn't just seem to be, I was! > > > I find it much easier to understand XSL semantics for myself, and to > explain them to others, if I take this point of view. > I think the original confusion in the "nearest ancester thread" came > about precisely because people were not thinking in this way. With this, and after carefully browsing the XPath spec, I'm agreed. Game. Set. Match. I'd never really thought clearly about this, and I responded without pausing to think clearly. I'd say I won't do it again, but I'd be lying. The funny part is that I (and colleagues) spent a considerable time pounding my head over the spec's obtuse wording with regard to reverse axes and proximity position in implementing (or rather fixing 4XPath months ago.) At that point I think it was actually made it easier for me to think of the node set in terms of having an intrinsic order. The proof of it is in 4XPath's implementation, which I'm pretty sure gets that mess quite right. -- Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +1 303 583 9900 x 101 Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com 4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Performance problem on Or, Steve Muench | Thread | Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Wolfgang May |
RE: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] Can sets have order?, Uche Ogbuji |
Month |