DR 10-0038 - OPC: Unused term "simple ordering"

[Alex Brown]

Chris hi

Yes, it looks like 10-0038 and 10-0039 are just wrong and should be closed. 

(Since I searched the text for these terms I suppose I must have put quotations marks round them - as for web searches - thus getting zero results). Sorry!

- Alex.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Rae [mailto:Chris.Rae at microsoft.com]
> Sent: 19 November 2010 00:27
> To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org; Alex Brown
> Subject: DR 10-0038 - OPC: Unused term "simple ordering"
> 
> http://cid-
> c8ba0861dc5e4adc.office.live.com/view.aspx/Public%20Documents/2010/DR
> -10-0038.docx
> 
> This DR covers the definition of the term "simple ordering", which it says is
> not used anywhere. I don't think this is quite right - "simple ordering"
> appears to be used (in the context in which it's defined) around nine times in
> Part 2. It's sister term, "interleaved ordering", is also used a similar number of
> times.
> 
> Alex, am I getting the wrong end of the stick?
> 
> Chris
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> ____________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> __________________________________________________________
> ____________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________