- From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 23:42:54 +0700
- 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