On Jan 11, 2006, at 15:44, Jim Ley wrote: > "Robin Berjon" <robin.berjon@expway.fr> wrote in message > news:3670757E-C2F0-44E4-A776-047C4C8B090C@expway.fr... >> Incidentally, the TAG's work on versioning concurs that the >> MustIgnore >> strategy in vocabulary design is sound. It's also in line with >> strategies >> adopted by other WGs for their vocabularies. > > but not by implementations, most of which attempt to error correct > and not > ignore, since that behaviour is much better for users, why does the > WG feel > it necessary to prevent this from happening? Sorry Jim but I'm not sure what you mean by "error-correct". If you mean loosening error conditions (eg accepting white space) then I agree, but it's a different issue from how actually errors need to be handled. -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2006 15:01:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:33 GMT