RE: RE: XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 Functions and Operato

> The basic idea of having sequences in the data model rather than sets is
> that the result of sorting a node-set can be assigned to a variable,
> something which isn't possible in XSLT 1.0. There are then mechanisms for
> iterating over a sequence or indexing into it.

It isn't clear enough why people always needed to do sorting before it
needed.
What if the new attribute (aka "sort-by") in the variable would be somehow
better (possibly?).

<xsl:variable name="country" sortby="name">
<x><y><xsl:copy-of select="document('c.xml')" /></y>
     <y><xsl:copy-of select="document('d.xml')" /></y></x>
</xsl:variable>

=== *.xml ===
<doc>
  <city name="Munchen" />
  <city name="Berlin" />
</doc>

Might be, the "ready-to-use sorted sets" aren't worse then "sorted
sequences"?
It's interesting to know about the possible motivations against such model
(implementation?)
Though, they were only thoughts, not more.

Taler Andy


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