On Sat, 16 May 2020, at 14:27, Jan Synacek wrote:
> I don't really have a strong opinion. I simply thought that the order
> in XML->SXML should be the same. Otherwise, I don't see how sxml-match
> is actually useful in such a case.
Attributes ordering should not matter in sxml-match, as per
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 02:27:15PM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
[...]
> > just imagine another XML processor in the middle changing
> > attribute order. It would be spec compliant. What now?
[...]
> In the middle of the first processor reading the file?
No, I was thinking much simpler than that.
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 2:36 PM Linus Björnstam
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 16 May 2020, at 14:27, Jan Synacek wrote:
>
> > I don't really have a strong opinion. I simply thought that the order
> > in XML->SXML should be the same. Otherwise, I don't see how sxml-match
> > is actually useful in such a
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 1:35 PM wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 12:29:54PM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
> > Consider the following code snippet running on Guile-3.0.2:
>
> [...]
>
> >
>
> [...]
>
> > (event (@ (number 2) (name KeyPress))
>
> > Attributes 'number' and 'name' are in reverse
On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 12:29:54PM +0200, Jan Synacek wrote:
> Consider the following code snippet running on Guile-3.0.2:
[...]
>
[...]
> (event (@ (number 2) (name KeyPress))
> Attributes 'number' and 'name' are in reverse compared to the original
> xml. On the other hand, 'type' and
Consider the following code snippet running on Guile-3.0.2:
(use-modules (sxml simple)
(sxml xpath))
(define doc
(call-with-input-file "/home/jsynacek/src/xcb-proto-1.13/src/xproto.xml"
(lambda (port)
(xml->sxml port
(define events ((sxpath '(// event)) doc))
