At 11:35 AM 11/24/99 -0500, Geoffrey M. Clemm wrote: >... propose that the statement in question be modified to explicitly >state "internal member", since depth:0 locks should only affect the >addition and removal of internal members. internal members, as opposed to those added by, say, BIND? Fine with me.Received on Thursday, 25 November 1999 19:05:11 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:43:52 GMT