- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 07:51:28 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <87646t0ywv.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> was heard to say:
| Shouldn't $p:position and $loop_index be the same? We say:
|
| "In contexts where a sequence of documents is being processed, for example,
| in the test expression of a p:matching-documents, this variable returns the
| position of the current document within the sequence. Numbering begins at
| one."
|
| The for-each processes a sequence.
Yes. Having thought about this some more, I think p:document-position()
inside a for-each ought to be the same as the index.
If we said that the p:document-position() inside a viewport was also the
same as the index, then I think we could do away with the index
altogether.
Inside a loop, it would always be the same as p:document-position(). If
a user wanted to be able to refer to the counter in some outer loop,
he or she could set an option and refer to that.
So now we only need:
p:episode()
and
p:document-position()
I like that better.
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Extinction, n. The raw material out of
http://nwalsh.com/ | which theology created the future
| state.--Ambrose Bierce
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2007 11:51:36 UTC