Anne van Kesteren wrote: > Some questions that came up while reading the draft: > > * Why isn't the specification using xml:id? > * Why is the specification using its own attribute rather than CSS? > * Why does the specification refer to CSS2, which has been revised? > * Why do we need a totally new specification for this which reinvents a > lot of elements and attributes? (And CSS.) > * Why does the specification has so many namespaces? > * I assume the namespaces will change before this specification goes to > CR? Although this is not really the "final publishing of this > specification" the specification and WG do need sufficient feedback > from implementors before they can move on to PR and beyond. -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/>Received on Monday, 21 March 2005 19:42:04 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 2 November 2009 22:41:32 GMT