Re: Superfluous conformance requirement

Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> writes:
> "A terminal must not be marked as an attribute (@) (error S04)"
> But it *cannot* be marked as an attribute, since it is ungrammatical.
> So I propose to replace this either with "Note that a terminal cannot
> be marked as an attribute (@)", or alternatively remove it altogether.
> Error S04 should then be removed.

Indeed. About six weeks ago, you changed:

  <p>A terminal is a literal or a set of characters. It matches one or more
  characters in the input. A terminal cannot be marked as an attribute. Since a
  terminal has no children, if it is marked with "-", it will serialise to the
  empty string.</p>

to:

  <p>A terminal is a literal or a set of characters. It matches characters in the
  input. A terminal <span class="conform">must</span> not be marked as an
  attribute (@), and a charset <span class="conform">must</span> not be marked as
  inserted (^). A terminal marked as deleted (-), serialises to the empty string.

That inadvertently changed a simple statement of fact into a conformance
statement. I failed to notice the error and simply drafted an error code
for the conformance statement. (Note to self: for future versions,
automate generating diffs so that it’s easier to spot these kinds of
things.)

I suggest you remove the statement altogether and delete S04 (without
(!) attempting to renumber the errors).

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--
Norm Tovey-Walsh
Saxonica