W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > October 2006

Re: [XBL] XBL 2.0 Introduction

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 22:57:16 +0000 (UTC)
To: karl@w3.org
Cc: public-appformats@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0610052252291.19875@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 karl@w3.org wrote:
> About http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xbl-20060907/#introduction
> Do not start the first sentence by "This specification".

Why not? It is far easier to rename a specification or to move content 
between specifications when the name of the specification isn't mentioned 
anywhere in the body.

> See comment about "abstract".

The comment about the abstract didn't explain why "This specification" was 
bad. I agree that "This specification" is bad in an abstract, because an 
abstract is supposed to be context insensitive. However this doesn't apply 
to the introduction.

> What is the semantics of the doubled line on the left? Is it an example? 
> Is it a note? Maybe that would be good to explain or contextualize a bit 
> more.

The presence of the doubled line on the left depends entirely on what 
stylesheet you are using. The text in the spec implies that the paragraphs 
in the doubled line are part of the first example; this seems pretty 
clear. I'm not sure how it could be explained without alienating people 
who are not using the same stylesheet.

In conclusion, I disagree with the suggestions made in this e-mail. Please 
let me know if you disagree with my disagreement so that I may clearly 
mark this in the disposition of comments.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 5 October 2006 22:57:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:50:05 UTC