On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Aankhen wrote:
On 3/11/06, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
I've reworded the paragraph like this:
pSome conformance requirements are phrased as requirements on
elements, attributes, methods or objects. Such requirements fall
into two
implementatino
--
dolphinling
http://dolphinling.net/
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, dolphinling wrote:
implementatino
Fixed, thanks.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E)\._.,--,'``.fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
On 3/11/06, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
I've reworded the paragraph like this:
pSome conformance requirements are phrased as requirements on
elements, attributes, methods or objects. Such requirements fall
into two categories; those describing content model
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, L. David Baron wrote:
This was changed as a result of:
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2004-December/002780.html
I'm not convinced that your suggested improvement scans better, and it
may in fact reintroduce the problem in a different
On Thursday 2006-03-09 17:56 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, L. David Baron wrote:
It says:
Conformance requirements phrased as requirements on elements,
attributes, methods or objects are conformance requirements on user
agents.
The ins and del elements
On 3/7/06, Ian Hickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, L. David Baron wrote:
[snip]
The opening sentence:
As well as sections marked as non-normative, all diagrams, examples,
and notes in this specification are non-normative.
is unnecessarily complicated. Instead, I
Some comments on section 1.8, Conformance requirements in the
2006-02-16 draft of Web Applications 1.0 (whose permanent URL claims to
be http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ ).
The opening sentence:
As well as sections marked as non-normative, all diagrams, examples,
and notes
