- From: Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net>
- Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 13:16:33 +1000
- To: public-html@w3.org
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 10:04:39PM -0500, Robert Burns wrote:
> I think Sander's proposed language is by far the clearest ("must reflect
> the datetime content attribute's value" might also work). I think the term
> '"content attribute" just makes it harder to read. Perhaps markup attribute
> would be better (though I know there are problems with that too). Language!
> (shakes head).
Perhaps "HTML attribute" would be better, as long as it is defined in the spec
to include XHTML (otherwise, it may be construed as referring only to the HTML
serialization).
Received on Sunday, 5 August 2007 03:16:40 UTC