Manu Sporny wrote:
Cameron McCormack wrote:
Manu Sporny:
3. Running the Anolis post-processor on the newly modified spec.
Geoffrey Sneddon:
Is there any reason you use --allow-duplicate-dfns?
I think it’s because the source file includes the source for multiple
specs (HTML 5, Web Sockets, et
Cameron McCormack wrote:
> Manu Sporny:
>>> 3. Running the Anolis post-processor on the newly modified spec.
>
> Geoffrey Sneddon:
>> Is there any reason you use --allow-duplicate-dfns?
>
> I think it’s because the source file includes the source for multiple
> specs (HTML 5, Web Sockets, etc.) w
Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
> Manu Sporny wrote:
>> 3. Running the Anolis post-processor on the newly modified spec.
>
> Is there any reason you use --allow-duplicate-dfns?
Legacy cruft. There was a time that I had duplicate dfns while
attempting to figure something else out. The latest commit to th
Manu Sporny:
> > 3. Running the Anolis post-processor on the newly modified spec.
Geoffrey Sneddon:
> Is there any reason you use --allow-duplicate-dfns?
I think it’s because the source file includes the source for multiple
specs (HTML 5, Web Sockets, etc.) which, when taken all together, have
du
Manu Sporny wrote:
3. Running the Anolis post-processor on the newly modified spec.
Is there any reason you use --allow-duplicate-dfns? Likewise, you
probably don't want --w3c-compat (the name is slightly misleading, it
provides compatibility with the CSS WG's CSS3 Module Postprocessor, not
