W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xpath-comments@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: issue (node-ordering)

From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 23:42:54 +0700
Message-ID: <378B6C8D.80405493@jclark.com>
To: "Weichel Bernhard (K3/EMW4) *" <Bernhard.Weichel@de.bosch.com>
CC: "'www-xpath-comments@w3.org'" <www-xpath-comments@w3.org>
Sorry, I don't understand your comment.  Could you try explaining again,
perhaps at greater length and with more examples?

"Weichel Bernhard (K3/EMW4) *" wrote:
> The design could be improved if there is a distinction between position
> (which relates to the position in the container) and rank which relates to
> the position in the result of a step.
> The result of a step should be in the order as the objects appear in the
> document related to the basis of the location step.
> The problem comes from issue (bracket-overload) which works on the position
> rather than on the rank within the result set of a step. In this case,
> "preceeding" gives the left sibling first.
> then
> preceeding::foo[rank()=1] and (preceeding::foo)[rank()=1] have the same
> result.
Received on Tuesday, 13 July 1999 15:57:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:13 UTC