I am confused as to it's status. The issue is whether there is a disallowed vocabulary. The notes have Michael saying there is, and I an thinks there is. This would suggest that closing the issue means saying that there is a disallowed vocabulary and a pointer to the appropriate place in the spec. However, I don't understand Peter's comment suggesting a break in backwards compatibility in this light. I will review the current spec to find what Michael is referring to. However a summary of current understand so as to verify we're (including me) are all on the same page would help if someone happens to have the time to write. -AlanReceived on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 16:59:32 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:41:50 UTC