- 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