W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ql@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: Recursive replacement

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:42:17 GMT
Message-Id: <200601301542.PAA23171@penguin.nag.co.uk>
To: martin@x-hive.com
CC: novak@ispras.ru, www-ql@w3.org

Martin

  Well, the constructor "element new-node {$p/*}" copies the contents of
  the node $p, so the outermost <a/> node is replaced with
  <new-node><b><a/></b></new-node>.


Yes but the question is really about the inermost a node.
Michael indicated that the table is intended to allow the operations
that commute, so it depends a bit on what the definition of equivalence
is.

If you replace the inner one first, then the outer one, then the effect
is as if you just replaced the outer one, as you indicate above.

If however you replace the outer one first, when you come to replace the
inner one, it's not there, so is that a merge conflict and an error, or
do you just silently do nothing in which case commutativity is
restored, and you get the same result as if you had done the operations
in the other order.


David


________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
Received on Monday, 30 January 2006 15:43:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:44 UTC