RE: [DM] stable order

Don Chamberlin wrote:
> I believe that the "in other words" sentence is correct. Our intention was 
> to define an implementation-dependent ordering among the documents and 
> document fragments that are in-scope for a given query. Furthermore, this 
> ordering is stable during the execution of a given query.

Perhaps the first sentence should be modified then.
The sentences we're discussing are

   "The relative order of nodes in distinct documents is 
   implementation-dependent but stable. In other words, given two 
   distinct documents A and B, if a node in document A is before a 
   node in document B, then every node in document A is before every 
   node in document B."

I interpret this first sentence as a statement about the order of node 
pairs, i.e. any two nodes from different documents are in some order 
and this order is stable.
You want to say that the *documents* are in some implementation-dependent
order which means if doc A is before doc B then node Na from A is before 
node Nb from B.

I think removing "nodes in" from the first sentence would avoid this
misinterpretation.

Regards,
Oliver Becker


/-------------------------------------------------------------------\
|  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, 25 June 2003 03:33:36 UTC