Re: definitions [was: closing on 2009-09-03]

At 14:38  -0700 27/08/09, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>If they have no semantic meaning at all, then the MUST NOT 
>requirement doesn't apply, which seems silly.

Doesn't that mean that they must not be used to carry any semantics, 
since they have none, doesn't it?  In this case, 'at odds with their 
semantics' is 'having any semantics at all'.
David Singer
Multimedia Standards, Apple Inc.

Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 15:29:24 UTC