- From: Daniel Glazman <glazman@netscape.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 09:25:15 +0100
- To: Robin Berjon <robin@knowscape.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
Robin Berjon wrote: >> I think this may be a bit clearer to use than the 6n+1 to 10 notation >> proposed earlier. > > > I totally agree ! cron-style notation is by far easier to read. I also > think it's generally far more intuitive than the an+b notation. More people in the unix community, probably. Seriously, try to put a web author in front of a crontab entry and take a look at his face... This is CSS, not a subdirectory of /var/spool I don't like Sicking's proposal for the following reasons : 1. I think that Tantek's father's suggestion which is in the current Last Call WD is elegant and simple, for both implementors and users, 2. I don't want to see a coding whitespace in the argument of a pseudo unless this whitespace is a descendant combinator, 3. we have a general agreement from all implementors on the current syntax 4. it took me, editor of the WD, fifteen seconds to understand your syntax. The an+b notation is in between cron's notation and Sicking's proposal. I am not at all in favor of a change. </Daniel>
Received on Friday, 2 March 2001 12:27:59 UTC