- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:58:44 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <874pljhkuz.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk> was heard to say: |> However, we want to be able to stream many of our microsteps. On that |> basis, I'd be in favor of saying that the context position and context |> size are both 1 when the replace expression is evaluated in |> p:string-replace (and in analagous situations on other steps). | | Unless the replace expression is prohibited from accesssing arbitrary | nodes, I don't see much advantage to this. You have to analyse the | expression to see if it needs the rest of the document, so you might | as well check for calls to position() and size() too. | |> Both require an unbounded amount of look ahead. | | As does replace="following-sibling::b" Hmm. True. But I think I still prefer position()=last()=1. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | If a little knowledge is dangerous, http://nwalsh.com/ | where is the man who has so much as to | be out of danger?--Thomas. H. Huxley
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 14:58:59 UTC