- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 04:35:46 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13024 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED CC| |ian@hixie.ch Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2011-08-15 04:35:44 UTC --- EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Partially Accepted Change Description: see diff given below Rationale: There's 645 occurrences of "IDL attribute". I'm not xreffing it. That's a non-starter. The term is defined in the first occurrence of the term after the table of contents, in the very first paragraph of the terminology section. That's basically required reading for anyone reading the spec. If anyone is reading it without first at least skimming the terminology section, it's not surprising that the spec won't make much sense. Marking the IDL boxes as IDL isn't a bad idea though. And I rather like the style zcorpan came up with. Done. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 15 August 2011 04:35:47 UTC