W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > May 2011

[Bug 12535] [DM] Definition of 'tree' missing and apparently non-standard

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 23:07:56 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1QRY2W-0005GQ-1b@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12535

Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mike@saxonica.com

--- Comment #3 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2011-05-31 23:07:54 UTC ---
I think it's best to stick to the current model whereby every node belongs to
exactly one tree, and a root node is therefore defined as being a node that has
no parent. If we adopted the alternative definition that every node is the root
of a tree, an awful lot of our terminology would have to change.

(Let's remember that the term comes from botany, not from mathematics. Each
apple in my garden grows on exactly one tree.)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 31 May 2011 23:07:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:12 GMT