- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:32:15 -0600
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: public-grddl-wg@w3.org
On Tue, 2007-02-27 at 18:57 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote: [...] > > 3) clarify normative text > > A silly pedantic point is that while the textual conventions for > normative text are very clear and clean, that are not followed > systematically. Quite. :-/ I don't know if you saw the link from the TOC... "Extract: normative material only @@in progress" -> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec_lean I had in mind to carefully review that this normative extract made sense on its own. Then I had in mind to drop it altogether, since I'm not all that invested in distinguishing between normative and informative stuff in the spec. The words in the spec are in the spec. But this review comment gives me pause. Hmm. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 19:32:24 UTC