Re: Bug in 'xsl:sort'. ( XT vs SAXON. )

[Paul Tchistopolskii <paul at qub dot com>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jeni Tennison 

> >Right. But I'm not sure the question is about 'English'. I think the 
> >question realy is 'in UTF8' ?
> 
> I disagree.  The xsl:sort documentation says: "'text' specifies that the
> sort keys should be sorted lexicographically in the culturally correct
> manner for the language specified by lang".  I'm assuming that the default
> language in Sebastians files is English.  Thus the sort should be done in
> English.

There was no Sebastian's files. 

I was sorting the file:

<doc>
<a><code>A</code></a>
<b><code>-1</code></b>
<c><code>0</code></c>
</doc>

<quote>
lang specifies the language of the sort keys; 
it has the same range of values as xml:lang [XML]; 
if no lang value is specified, the language should be 
determined from the system environment
</quote>

Maybe they are 'determining' diffrent languages 
from  the 'system environment'. Instant SAXON determines 
one 'system environment' and XT  ( I was running 
it on Sun's  JVM ) is determining another 
'system environment'. 

All this is rocket science to me. Very complex stuff. 
I give up.

I have a feeling that you understand something  that I
don't understand. To me this is still crazy that 2 processors 
are sorting this file differently and both are 'correct'. Anyway - 
the usecase could be considered 'exotic and not critical'.

Rgds.Paul.

PS. I now don't understand what is conformant in this world 
and what is not .  For sure I'l now always specify  the 
'number'  for sorting numbers, like it should be - 
but I think this could  result in significant overhead. 

PPS. Better not to use XSLT for sorting at all. Who knows 
what is that 'conformant sorting?' ;-)





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