- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 16:54:11 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9356 Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3cbug@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #2 from Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3cbug@gmail.com> 2010-04-02 16:54:10 --- Well, this is just stylistic, so I won't object if you reclose. But you're using the word "Errors" inconsistently in the section headings here, and it confused me on first reading. Some of them use "error" to mean "the use of erroneous markup by authors" (e.g., "Errors that can result in infoset coercion"), while others use "error" to mean "error report by a validator" or "the fact that the spec declares something an error" or something (e.g., this one). It would be clearer if you only used the former, since that's what "error" normally means: an erroneous action, not a declaration of error. Or you could just reword to not use "errors" in the headings. In this particular case it seemed like you were saying that authors' commission of errors encouraged correct understanding of the spec. I assumed that you meant their errors would be read by other authors copy-pasting markup, and encourage those other authors to interpret the spec incorrectly. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Friday, 2 April 2010 16:54:15 UTC