Subject: RE: XSLT/XPATH jargon
From: "Pawson, David" <DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 08:36:42 -0000
|
John E. Simpson wrote:
[snip]
>All I meant was that the definition should point out that
>document order is
>independent of the l-to-r/r-to-l/top-to-bottom/bottom-to-top
>convention for
>the language in which the document is written... and/or drop the word
>"normally"... or provide an example in which the doc order is
>NOT top down,
>l-to-r.
>
>I don't know; maybe this is a case of over-exactitude at the
>expense of
>clarity.
Clarity was the intent. I'm guessing the audience is more likely
to be a new user than a Mike Kay :-)
regards, DaveP
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|