> > This property follows from the fact that the body of the relation is
> > a mathematical set; sets in mathematics are not ordered."
>
> That (and private mail I've received) does it. The pure mathematician (David)
> wins that point. In pure math, sets seem strictly not to have order.
>
> > This is a rather significant point in his discussion.
>
> Perhaps, but rather useless in the discussion that prompted the matter.
We know that
ancestor::*[1]
and
(ancestor::*)[1]
evaluates to different nodes if there is more than 1 ancestor.
Do you think it would be reasonable to assume, ancestor::* has some
intrinsic order? Would it help understanding XSLT?
I don't think so.
Cheers,
Oliver
/-------------------------------------------------------------------\
| ob|do Dipl.Inf. Oliver Becker |
| --+-- E-Mail: obecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| op|qo WWW: http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~obecker |
\-------------------------------------------------------------------/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list