This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: Can sets have order?
David Carlisle writes:
>
> > Then if x' is obtained by exchanging X1 and x2 in X,
>
> what does exchanging two elements of a set mean?
> (This is a real question, I don't understand your point.)
What I meant is the following:
The node set is exported, e.g., as ASCII representation, and, e.g.,
put as a file on the Web or sent to somebody who should use it.
Then, in this file, the two nodes which are deep-equal are exchanged.
This does not effect anything the recipient does with the XML instance.
> Every node in a note set is uniquely identifiable, so for example
>
> <xsl:value-of select="//*[generate-id(.)=generate-id(current())]"/>
>
> always returns the current node (if we are currently on an element node)
Yes, but only due to the use of an additional function.
Thus, I argued that XML node sets - without any additional information
due to internal representation - are multisets. When using the
internal representation, the set is not only not a multiset, but it is
also ordered (which was the initial topic of the thread).
Wolfgang
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list