- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:52:23 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3676 ------- Comment #1 from simeon@us.ibm.com 2006-09-26 14:52 ------- Tim, Despite those rules having been checked by many people (See Bugs #2303, #1968, #1728), I believe you are right that we could and probably should cover '+' as well as '*'. I don't believe you could do better than prime(Type)? since + only guarantees there is at least one item. That said, I don't believe the rules are broken (in the sense of being inconsistent) so I am not sure what the working groups will want to reconsider this, considering the late stage of the process. - Jerome
Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2006 15:02:12 UTC