[closed] Re: document sequence

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:
> The phrase is used throughout the CR, yet is undefined.
> I don't think the term is overloaded, though perhaps
> a definition would make that clear?
>
> I'm taking it to mean
>
> <doc/>
> <doc/>
> <doc/>
>
> Is that the intention?

I think this is a duplicate of 
http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/cr-comments/#C059

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Time makes more converts than
http://nwalsh.com/            | reason.--Tom Paine