>> In XPath, each
>> element can be addressed with two coordinates, the first being the element
>> path (/document/book/title/chapter), the second being the position ([5])
>
> Just the pair:
>
> (count(ancestor::node()), count(preceding::node()))
>
But, no two nodes should be able to have the same number of
preceding::node()
So why do you need the pair? Why not just count(preceding::node()))?
On 9/8/10 4:20 PM, "Dimitre Novatchev" <> wrote:
>> XML structures can be addressed with XPath. XPath model is essentially two-
>> dimensional, as it has orthogonal depth and breadth dimensions.
>
> Correct.
>
>> Depth is the
>> nesting of elements
>
> Correct.
>
>> and breadth is the number of siblings.
>
> Wrong.
>
> You can easily find more than one element at a given depth and having
> the same number of (total, preceding or following) siblings.
>
> One way to express the breadth dimension correctly is :
>
> count(preceding::node())
>
> Do note: this is the count of *all preceding nodes*, not just the
> count of all preceding siblings.
>
>
>> In XPath, each
>> element can be addressed with two coordinates, the first being the element
>> path (/document/book/title/chapter), the second being the position ([5])
>
> Just the pair:
>
> (count(ancestor::node()), count(preceding::node()))
>
