> > 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