> In my opinion, unordered() must remain a function, because it clearly mark > the scope of the directive; that is, you know that all that is inside the > parenthesis will be potentially returned in a random order. But then, please, don't call it a function if it is not a function. (Dimitre, help! ;-) ) Could it be a comprise to change the terminology to something else ("directive" or whatever) but leave the grammar as it is? For example, node() looks like a functions, but it is not. The same way unordered(..) would look like a function, but it is in reality something very different. Oliver /-------------------------------------------------------------------\ | ob|do Dipl.Inf. Oliver Becker | | --+-- E-Mail: obecker@informatik.hu-berlin.de | | op|qo WWW: http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~obecker | \-------------------------------------------------------------------/Received on Wednesday, 24 September 2003 11:47:00 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:01 GMT