- From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:31:18 +0100
- To: Daniel Sullivan <dsullivan@danal.com>
- Cc: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, "public-microxml@w3.org" <public-microxml@w3.org>
On 5 September 2012 14:23, Daniel Sullivan <dsullivan@danal.com> wrote: > I guess I'm taking a parochial end users view and not looking at how complicated the spec will be. > > Having to do something like > > <box test="length>1"/> > > When what I mean is > > <box test="length>1"/> > > doesn't make sense to me. what about <box test="length gt 1"/> or <box test="length greater-than 1"/> or <box test="is-greater-than(length, 1)"/> etc there's no restriction on the language designer to use < and >, it's not a reason (imo) to add complexity to microxml... -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com
Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2012 13:31:51 UTC