- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 11:57:07 +0900
- To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org, public-i18n-core@w3.org
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 02:25:01 +0900, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Felix Sasaki wrote: >> > >> > Your notion of "type": It would be good if you note that there are >> different >> > notions of types, e.g. the element name as a type (as in the case of >> CSS) as >> > the XML Schema notion of types. >> >> It is not the draft which makes the confusion, but the fact that esp. in >> the last years of W3C standardization various notion of types have been >> created. Since you seem to aim this document for a wider audience, you >> might not only technical issues into account, but also readability / >> wider context issues. > > The working group discussed this issue. > > We do not understand where the confusion is. The term "element type" is a > well-established term used since before 1986. While the word "type" does > have other meanings, of course, it does not seem confusing in this > context. > > If this does not satisfy you, please let us know more detailed reasons > for your request. > > Cheers, Hi, We are not satisfied with your reply. All what we require is a non-normative statement which says "this is not the type as in XML Schema". Regards, Felix.
Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2006 02:57:16 UTC