[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Parents disinherit their children

Subject: Re: Parents disinherit their children
From: "James Tauber" <jtauber@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 11:48:37 -0400
disinherit
> However, I'm concerned about the logical inconsistency in this
> statement as currently written. In common usage, both technical and
> genealogical, the statement that A is the parent of B clearly implies
> that B is the child of A. Why is this common understanding of
> language broken here? Is there anything that can be done to fix it?

The distinction goes back to the Infoset, which XPath makes use of.

Notice that an element's children have an ordering whereas attribute and
namespace nodes do not (and "children" in common usage have an ordering).

Here is a way of looking at it that softens the apparent inconsistency:

A parent has children and other properties (attributes / namespace nodes).
The properties still belong to the parent so you can ask "what is the parent
to which these properties belong?".

It's not perfect (in particular, a "parent" might not have any children) but
I just though of it then! :-)

James Tauber


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.