So can I somehow use generate-id() to get all numeric unique random
ids for a node? Is that even possible?
"random" and "id" are mutually exclusive: an id cannot be "random" as
it must identify a *certain* node.
Also, if ids are random, it is possible that two ids for two different
nodes may have the same value -- something not allowed by definition
for an id.
--
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev
---------------------------------------
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
---------------------------------------
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
-------------------------------------
Never fight an inanimate object
-------------------------------------
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play
-------------------------------------
I enjoy the massacre of ads. This sentence will slaughter ads without
a messy bloodbath.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 12:45 PM, a kusa <akusa8(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Thanks again Michael. My requirement is that I want to generate unique
random numbers only for a node. I know generate-id() generate unique
ids for a node. But its not all numeric. It is alpha numeric. I have
been reading some old issues in the list and one Abel had written
something about being able to use generate-id() although I think the
issue was generating sequential numbers in XSLT.
(Ref:
http://markmail.org/message/4zxb654yeaf5twnv#query:+page:1+mid:uryukocvwy6oqnuc+state:results)
So can I somehow use generate-id() to get all numeric unique random
ids for a node? Is that even possible?
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Michael Kay <mike(_at_)saxonica(_dot_)com>
wrote:
So my next idea was to use the generate-id() function which
generates unique ids, and hack it to get a random number. Any
thoughts on this approach?
It won't give you anything that could reasonably be described as a random
number, but since you haven't told us your requirements, we can't tell you
whether it's an adequate solution.
If a bad randomizing algorithm is good enough for Microsoft when facing a
€100m penalty (see [1]), then it might be good enough for you too.
[1]
http://news.techworld.com/applications/3213973/microsoft-browser-ballot-not-random/?olo=rss
Regards,
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail:
<mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail:
<mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--