- From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 10:03:53 -0500
- To: xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com
- Cc: xsl-editors@w3.org
At 10:02 AM +0000 1/2/02, Michael Kay wrote: >Another >option that's on the table is that we never interpret "<" as a lexicographic >comparison, forcing the user to use the compare() function instead, or >perhaps the new "lt" operator.). >> That makes the most sense to me and follows the principle of least surprise. Naive lexicographic comparison is really not something that should be encouraged. It works, sometimes, for English-language ASCII text. It completely falls apart (i.e. fails to do what users expect it to do) when faced with other character sets and languages. -- +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer | +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) | | http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/ | | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ | | Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/ | +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2002 11:14:38 UTC