Grosso, Paul wrote: > Re JP-002, I looked at our Note again too, and I think we should > make it clearer than just a font change. Perhaps we should put > "[unspecified]" (that is, in brackets) as well as the font change. Personally I found putting square brackets around it even more confusing -- it looks like some important piece of syntax to me. If there is ambiguity (personally I'm not convinced there is) wouldn't it be better to put note below table saying eg: Value "unspecified" in the second or third column of the table indicates that the corresponding pseudo-attribute is not specified on xml-model processing instruction. What do you think? Jirka -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz ------------------------------------------------------------------ Professional XML consulting and training services DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing ------------------------------------------------------------------ OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member ------------------------------------------------------------------Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 14:44:13 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 7 April 2011 14:44:13 GMT