- From: Michael Rys <mrys@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 00:04:09 -0800
- To: "David Carlisle" <davidc@nag.co.uk>, "Ashok Malhotra" <ashokma@microsoft.com>
- Cc: <dnovatchev@yahoo.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
I agree with David on this. Move this function as an example into an appendix. Best regards Michael > -----Original Message----- > From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Carlisle > Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 4:40 PM > To: Ashok Malhotra > Cc: dnovatchev@yahoo.com; public-qt-comments@w3.org > Subject: RE: [F&O] deep-equal > > > > > Thanks! We are going to give it another try! > > I think that the language would be better without this in the core, and > users would benefit from being given a complete definition in the > appendix that they could tune to their own needs, however in either > case, I think that if you want to ignore comments the rule should be > for elements, if it has no element children, compare the _string value_ > this will get rid of the anomalous text node slitting due to comments > and pis. > > David >
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2003 03:04:12 UTC