[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
Re: [xsl] Sorting Upper-Case first. Microsoft bug?
Subject: Re: [xsl] Sorting Upper-Case first. Microsoft bug?|
From: Stan Devitt <jsdevitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 22:22:03 -0400
Actually, I don't think we are that far apart. I strongly agree with
you that the kind sort you mention is very important. I was definitely
not suggesting it be removed and I don't really care what the various
sorts are called. (Also, I'm only guessing that true lexicographic
really was meant in the first place ...)
My biggest concern was over the "technical" contradiction between the
REC and the implementations and the evident difficulty in reaching a
concensus on that fact.
I was also somewhat surprised that people did not seem to have noticed
that an implementor COULD have remained technically true to the
lexicographic reference in the spec. and also addressed many (50% ?,
80%?, more? ) cultural differences also as directed by the REC. The
fact that multiple implementors chose to sacrifice the technical meaning
of lexicographic to further the cultural directive just lends weight to
your argument of how important the other kind sort is and I'm not
disagreeing with their decision.
Bottom line: People should not be this confused by the REC. A REC of
this sort should definitely not
use a technical word like lexicographic in a non-technical sense.
Either it did, or there is a contradiction.
We may still disagree on the importance of a true lexicographic sort,
but we can debate that elsewhere.
Myself, I find it much more useful for my kind of data . :)
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list