W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-comments@w3.org > July to September 2007

RE: Comments on GRDDL (using 3rd-party XML schemas with GRDDL) [OK?]

From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 11:53:36 +0100
To: 'Norman Gray' <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>, "'C. M. Sperberg-McQueen'" <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Cc: ogbujic@ccf.org, 'Jonathan Robie' <jonathan.robie@redhat.com>, 'Andrew Eisenberg' <andrew.eisenberg@us.ibm.com>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, w3c-xsl-query@w3.org
Message-id: <005901c7da73$8a29d500$313410ac@turtle>


> > (But my experience suggests that "may not"
> > can be ambiguous for some users 

It's ambiguous, full stop. It's only unambiguous to those readers who may
not see the alternative meaning. Editors may not use it.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

Received on Thursday, 9 August 2007 10:53:52 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Liam Quin: "Re: Comments on GRDDL (using 3rd-party XML schemas with GRDDL) [OK?]"
Previous message: Norman Gray: "Re: Comments on GRDDL (using 3rd-party XML schemas with GRDDL) [OK?]"
In reply to: Norman Gray: "Re: Comments on GRDDL (using 3rd-party XML schemas with GRDDL) [OK?]"
Next in thread: Liam Quin: "Re: Comments on GRDDL (using 3rd-party XML schemas with GRDDL) [OK?]"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:43 GMT