Re: PFWG report on @headers status

Hi Josh,

Thanks for the report.

One thing that I would like to document in the Wiki is the design notes sub-point on cyclic referencing. You mentioned:

> There has bee some concern voiced about the potential for cyclic
> references if chained headers were allowed in the specification. This
> seems to some degree to be unfounded. The relationship between a
> header and any corresponding chained/nested/ conceptual header that
> follows it is uni-directional and not bi-directional. This also
> follows if the id of a <td> cell is to be referenced from a chained
> header.

How is this point semi-founded? How can it be addressed and resolved as  either "founded" or "unfounded"?

I thought that detail had been discussed previously and had been resolved:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Sep/0457.html

In order to make progress on this issue, it would be good to declare this point one way or the other.

Thanks again.

Best Regards,
Laura

--
Laura L. Carlson