Le 6 oct. 06 à 10:08, Ian Hickson a écrit :
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, Karl Dubost wrote:
What I meant is
"Has the WG forgotten to address authoring tools or was it
intentional
to not talk about them?"
Hope it helps to clarify the question.
Oh! Yes this does indeed much clarify the question.
No, I didn't forget about authoring tools. There just wasn't
anything to
say about them. However, in response to one of your other comments
I've
now explicitly mentioned them in the conformance section. Let me
know if
that's ok.
Using the version in CVS
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/xbl2/Overview.html?content-
type=text/html#conformance
Searching for author in the conformance section doesn't give many
answers except in
"… but there really is no good reason to use that
prefix in selectors, so authors are encouraged to
avoid doing so."
Where do you explicitly mention them? or maybe not committed in CVS
yet. Let me know when you have done it.
Thanks
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
