W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > November 2008

Re: PFWG report on @headers status

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:04:27 -0600
Message-ID: <1c8dbcaa0811250704n5a63cff2ma9d68f868eae5de5@mail.gmail.com>
To: joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie
Cc: "Al Gilman" <Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org>, "Janina Sajka" <janina@a11y.org>, "Michael Cooper" <cooper@w3.org>, "Gez Lemon" <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>

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:

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 L. Carlson
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2008 15:05:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:39 UTC