- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 12:56:46 -0500
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@us.ibm.com>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 15:42 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Aug 2, 2007, at 18:16, Sam Ruby wrote: [...] > > * The notion of “enclosing element” is problematic in the face > > of adoption agency algorithms and the like. The prudent thing to > > do is to define any case where reparenting would change the meaning > > of any element to be a (recoverable) error. This would affect very > > few users or documents. It would be a bitch to code in a > > conformance checker, but that’s not the spec’s writer’s concern. :-) > > Reparenting is already an error. Care to elaborate? If anybody has a moment to walk me/us thru the relevant parts of the spec, or just point to it, I'd appreciate it. [...] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Friday, 3 August 2007 17:56:57 UTC