Subject: RE: controls

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 12:21:25 -0600

We could state that the ordering in the sequence is not significant
unless specified by a control specification.

>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]> 10/02/02 08:13PM >>>
At 05:40 PM 2002-10-01, Ramsay, Ron wrote:
>Actually, I think the stand should be that order is not important.

I don't see any reason why we should take a stand here,
especially given that any future extension specification
can override any stand we might take. 

We should, however, clarify whether the default ordering
semantics is "set" or "sequence" so that authors and readers
of control extension specifications don't have to guess
as to what semantics apply in absence of an explicit
statement as to what semantics apply.

Kurt