On Sun, 2002-07-28 at 03:38, Patrick Stickler wrote: [...] > > but there are > > still three or four viable candidates: > > > > - untidy > > - tidy > > - two properties > > This has already been rejected by the WG. I don't recall any such decision. Giving your position on the issue is fine, but if you're going to cite group decisions, please do so by reference to the record. [...] > The WG has already decided that datatyping should work by one of the > two proposed options, which decision are you referring to here? > based on the tidyness of literals, or lack > thereof. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ see you in Montreal in August at Extreme Markup 2002?Received on Sunday, 28 July 2002 10:53:32 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:53 EDT