Re: ORA-DM-DOCORDER

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/ Stephen Buxton <stephen.buxton@oracle.com> was heard to say:
| *Data Model, Section 3.2 Document order*
| The definition defines "document order" for all nodes in a document,
| but the same notion of order is intended to apply to all trees,
| including fragments.
| This is seen, for example, in section 4.1.8 "children Accessor", where
| it says that "For document and element nodes, it returns the nodes
| that are children of that node in document order". An element in a
| fragment needs to have its children ordered, but the definition of
| "document order" does not currently cover this case since "document
| order" only applies to documents.
|
| One solution would be to change the term from "document order" to
| "tree order". However, the term "document order" seems pretty well
| entrenched, so perhaps a better solution is to keep the term but make
| it apply to all trees, not just documents.

This section has been redrafted in the 12 Nov spec to make this
clearer.
                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

- -- 
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQE/skerOyltUcwYWjsRAoFMAKCbRnw8Rgox8ZiHKh5NbN2nr4BB9QCfSQLD
mu5BRvOAk2Oinfdg3tABcYg=
=Q82B
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Thursday, 13 November 2003 20:18:27 UTC