Relative ordering of web fragments

[Thihup]

The spec says that valid ordering of the may be one of:

B, E, F, <no id>, C, D
B, E, F, <no id>, D, C
E, B, F, <no id>, C, D
E, B, F, <no id>, D, C
E, B, F, D, <no id>, C
E, B, F, D, <no id>, D

However, the last one repeats the "D" fragment,
Is this really valid or this should be E, B, F, C, <no id>, D?

[markt-asf]

I don't think that is quite right as <no id> has to be before C. I think it should be:

B, E, F, <no id>, C, D
B, E, F, <no id>, D, C
E, B, F, <no id>, C, D
E, B, F, <no id>, D, C
E, B, F, D, <no id>, C
B, E, F, D, <no id>, C

I'd be tempted to reorder the list as well but for clarity I think I'll just correct the last line.
I'll provide a PR.

[gregw]

@janbartel ?

[janbartel]

@gregw I think @markt-asf is right and the last line is wrong: the last element must be C because <no id> must always be before C, and B E F can be in the order he shows.

It seems a little odd that that D could be interposed between <no id> and C but technically that maintains the relationship of <no id> before C so the spec is satisfied.