On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 01:12:29 +0100, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
It appears that many of my suggestions are considered to be several
longer term participants to be "out of scope."
"This specification is limited to providing a semantic-level markup
language and associated semanti
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 10:17:33 +0100, Alexey Feldgendler
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The spec defines exactly under what circumstances are parse errors
> > generated. I think it's out of scope to define how/whether
> these parse
> > errors are reported.
>
> Agreed
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 10:17:33 +0100, Alexey Feldgendler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The spec defines exactly under what circumstances are parse errors
generated. I think it's out of scope to define how/whether these parse
errors are reported.
Agreed. Also, as discussed on this list it doesn't
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 01:28:59 +0600, Mike Schinkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I'm wondering if you collectively would consider adding the following to
the spec; a recommendation that clients offer two "modes"; one mode
being for
users where the spec works as currently envisioned. The second
I'm wondering if you collectively would consider adding the following to the
spec; a recommendation that clients offer two "modes"; one mode being for
users where the spec works as currently envisioned. The second mode would be
for web developers and would generate errors for invalid markup as opp
