-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Grosso, Paul writes: > It generally looks good (not counting the front matter, of course). Front matter now done, sorry to have not got that in place before. > Comparing the diff version with the errata document, I note: > > 1. We turned "attributes unique" into an NSC, but there is no > corresponding erratum for this. This doesn't really bother > me, but I thought I'd mention it. Hmm. That's NPE29 [1], which I _thought_ we had approved. . . Yes, we did [2], I just failed to update the NPE and add an actual erratum - -- done now. > 2. In Appendix F, you did not include in the PER the Note in > the erratum that explains production [6]. I think you should, > as even though I was present during the WG discussion, I had > already forgotten the explanation as to how production [6] works, > and I couldn't re-figure it out without reading the Note. Oversight on my part, now included. [1] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.html#NPE29 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0051.html - -- Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFKZyCvkjnJixAXWBoRAs3TAJ9tpVmA3ebq7/WYlO7Q8vuIQB4EXQCfQAlZ yEY2epKNBb3vln2CCUxz8fQ= =O7Si -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 14:23:17 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 22 July 2009 14:23:17 GMT