- From: Jo Rabin <jo@linguafranca.org>
- Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:13:38 +0100
- To: "'Frank Ellermann'" <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
- Cc: <public-bpwg-comments@w3.org>
Hello Frank Many thanks for your clarification off-list. The BPWG has reviewed your comments about the apparently broken references and non-breaking space characters. The apparently broken references are caused by the target being specified by an id attribute, rather than an <a name= construction - and it would seem that your browser does not recognise this construction. In view of the document having been produced by a standard XSLT Style sheet that is widely used for other documents from the W3C, it was decided to leave the document as is, in these respects. Regards Jo > -----Original Message----- > From: public-bpwg-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-comments- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jo Rabin > Sent: 08 September 2006 16:08 > To: 'Frank Ellermann' > Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org > Subject: RE: CR-mobile-bp-20060627 > > > Hello Frank > > The Best Practices Working Group has decided to change the document to > refer > to GIF 89a, without limitations, in the light of your comments. > > I found one broken internal reference, but you refer to several. It would > be > very helpful if you were able to supply any further information. > > On the subject of troublesome characters, again it would be very helpful > if > you were able to provide more detailed information about the problem you > describe and perhaps you could let us know what browser/version you are > using. > > Thanks again for your comments. > Jo > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-bpwg-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-bpwg-comments- > > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sean Owen > > Sent: 16 August 2006 15:50 > > To: Frank Ellermann > > Cc: public-bpwg-comments@w3.org > > Subject: Re: CR-mobile-bp-20060627 > > > > > > First I apologize for not replying earlier and thank you for the > > comments. The document is automatically generated with XSLT and the > > result has some problems, but I believe they can be fixed. > > > > I will bring up the point on GIF 89a/87a with the group in this week's > > call. You are suggesting that we either specify GIF 87a only, or > > specify 89a and allow for transparency? > > > > Thanks, > > Sean > > > > On 8/1/06, Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, could you please "downgrade" this document to be visible > > > with "any" browser ? Some internal links apparently have no > > > anchors, or their anchors have no name=, I didn't check the > > > source. I'd also appreciate it if you replace the three used > > > non-ASCII characters by NCRs or symbolic references ( in > > > the table of contents). > > > > > > In section 3.7 (default delivery context) you allow JPEG and > > > GIF 89a (non-interlaced, non-transparent, non-animated). The > > > latter would be almost the same as GIF 87a adding text chunks. > > > What is a mobile device supposed to do with text in GIF 89a ? > > > Or in other words, what's wrong with the transparency concept > > > in GIF 89a ? > > > > > > Bye, Frank > > > > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 2 October 2006 15:18:16 UTC