- From: <Svgdeveloper@aol.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 12:32:23 EDT
- To: mrys@microsoft.com
- CC: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2003 12:32:37 UTC
In a message dated 06/05/2003 17:21:45 GMT Daylight Time, mrys@microsoft.com writes: > I think some editorial rewording may solve it. What about: > > An item $x is identical to a singleton sequence containing that item in > the sense that $x = ((), $x). Michael, If the phrase "is identical" (which for me is an absolute term) was replaced then the seeming inconsistency would, I think, be resolved. In your suggested solution replacing "is identical" with "is equivalent" (or something similar) would satisfy me. I am happy to leave it to the WG to tidy this up. Regards Andrew Watt
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2003 12:32:37 UTC