On Fri, 28 Nov 2008, Mark Baker wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Henri Sivonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 25, 2008, at 21:12, Mark Baker wrote: > > > >> Defining the language in terms of an abstraction which isn't relevant to > >> all uses of HTML is IMO, > >> prima facie a bad idea. > > > > Would you accept an abstraction of "document tree"? > > I'd accept any solution that could be understood by a layperson.
How do we determine what is understood by a layperson? -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
