- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:23:23 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=28041 --- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- It's not correct to suggest that 21.1 says nothing. It defines a map as "A map consists of a set of entries. " Defining it as a set makes it clear that in the data model, there is no intrinsic order. The problem only arises with functions that have to presen the set as a sequence, namely map:keys() and map:for-each-entry(). It's also clear for both these functions that the result order is implementation-dependent (NB, not implementation-defined). So the only remaining question is whether, when the results of a function are implementation-dependent but deterministic, two calls with the same arguments are required to deliver the same result. F+O answers this question in 1.6.4: <quote> Some functions (such as fn:distinct-values and fn:unordered) produce results in an ·implementation-defined· or ·implementation-dependent· order. In such cases there is no guarantee that the order of results from different calls will be the same. These functions are said to be non-deterministic with respect to ordering. </quote> That seems clear enough to me. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2015 21:23:26 UTC