Re: Question about selector scope and rule order

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Felix Sasaki wrote:
> 
> 
>>> In other words: the selector points to one or more nodes, we apply
>>> the ITS property there. If there are already ITS properties
>>> applied in some children of these nodes are they overriden or not?
>>>   
> 
> that depends on the order of the rules. if
>  //y
> comes after
>  //x//y
> then the second rule wins
> 
>> I would say you don't need to do an override: In my XQuery
>> implementation, XPath expressions like "//text[@localize='no']" are
>> interpreted as "//text[@localize='no']/descendant-or-self::*". How
>> about you, Sebastian?
> 
> I don't think I agree. My view is that only "translate" is inherited,
> not "localize". I think the selector should be "//text//*" for localize,
> if that is really want is meant.
> 
> Or do we expect "localize" to be inherited?

I have no preference, we should just decide on s.t. , and make it clear
in the draft.

- Felix