- From: Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:00:18 +0100
- To: Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net>
- Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAA0AChWeW_izx3WA7r7q4P5kf1dZzJbLj1aXGz9cSXfROMXdMA@mail.gmail.com>
or, better, 'singular' ---- Stephen D Green On 2 October 2012 14:59, Stephen D Green <stephengreenubl@gmail.com> wrote: > 'single' ? > ---- > Stephen D Green > > > > On 2 October 2012 14:37, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net> wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Stephen D Green < >> stephengreenubl@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Why / in what sense "unique"? I think I know what is meant >>> but it could be taken the wrong way. Clearly two documents >>> can have identical canonical versions and therefore neither >>> be 'unique'. >>> >> >> But each c14n would be unique in respect to a particular transform. >> James's wording is clearly talking about the range, not the domain. In >> other words the output of a c14n transform is unique even though its inputs >> need not be. I'm not sure it would be clearer to use wording to the effect >> that it's a many to one transform. >> >> >> -- >> Uche Ogbuji http://uche.ogbuji.net >> Founding Partner, Zepheira http://zepheira.com >> http://wearekin.org >> http://www.thenervousbreakdown.com/author/uogbuji/ >> http://copia.ogbuji.net >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ucheogbuji >> http://twitter.com/uogbuji >> >> >
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 14:01:09 UTC