RE: following-sibling and xsl:sort
> > Me too. Turing completeness is not the same as closure over > the data model. > > To take an obvious example, there is no way of creating a > result tree that > > contains an unparsed entity, even though the data model > allows unparsed > > entities to exist. > > Closure only implies that you never create anything not in > the set; not > that you can create everything in the set. Thanks for the correction, you're right of course. Is there a term for what I was trying to express: "complete coverage", perhaps? Michael Kay
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format