Editing

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/doc/indices.md b/doc/indices.md
index 1b857466..21abc8be 100644
--- a/doc/indices.md
+++ b/doc/indices.md
@@ -50,6 +50,6 @@ To match this format, Range (`↕`) could be changed to return a flat array when
 
 The most interesting feature would be that Select could still allow `𝕨` to be nested. In this case each element of `𝕨` would be an array with cell indices for its rows as before. However, each row can now index along multiple axes, allowing some adjacent axes to be dependent while others remain independent. This nicely unifies scatter-point and per-axis selection, and allows a mix of the two. However, it doesn't allow total freedom, as non-adjacent axes can't be combined except by also mixing in all axes in between.
 
-Group (`⊔`) could accept the same index format for its index argument `𝕨`. Each depth-1 array in `𝕨` would correspond to multiple axes in the outer result array, but only a single axis in `𝕩` and inner arrays. Because the ravel ordering of indices must be used to order cells of inner arrays, this modification is not quite as clean as the change to Select. It's also not so clearly useful, as the same results can be obtained by using atomic indices and reshaping the result.
+Group (`⊔`) could accept the same index format for its index argument `𝕨`. Each depth-1 array in `𝕨` would correspond to multiple axes in the outer result array, but only a single axis in `𝕩` and inner arrays. Because the index ordering of indices must be used to order cells of inner arrays, this modification is not quite as clean as the change to Select. It's also not so clearly useful, as the same results can be obtained by using atomic indices and reshaping the result.
 
 Overall it seems to me that the main use of cell indices of the type discussed here is for the Select primitive, and the other cases are somewhat contrived and awkward. So I've chosen not to support it in BQN at all.