RE: MS-FO-LC1-018: Redundant mention of NaN in section 6.3. from Ashok Malhotra on 2003-07-30 (public-qt-comments@w3.org from July 2003)

From: Ashok Malhotra <ashokma@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 05:52:24 -0700
To: "Michael Rys" <mrys@microsoft.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E5B814702B65CB4DA51644580E4853FB09D18ACB@red-msg-12.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

Michael:
I'm not sure exactly what you would like changed.  All 3 functions in 
section 6.3 discuss behavior for NaN arguments.  I think it reads better

this way.  As someone else commented you can come to a function
definition
by following a pointer.  If common semantics are put at the top of the 
section the user can miss it.

All the best, Ashok

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Michael Rys
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 4:10 PM
> To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
> Subject: MS-FO-LC1-018: Redundant mention of NaN in section 6.3.
> 
> 
> Class: Editorial
> 
> Redundant mention of NaN in section 6.3.
> 
> 
> PS: MS-FO-LC1-017's class should have been technical
>

Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:52:35 UTC