- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 07:16:55 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6926 --- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> 2009-05-21 07:16:54 --- Sorry about that, should now be fixed. Anyone know why we have a DTD for the catalog (as well as a schema), and why the DTD imposes constraints that are not present in the schema? We seem to be making our lives unnecessarily difficult. The reason I didn't include the section numbers in the tests is of course that (a) there isn't yet a published spec that integrates the higher-order-functions specification, so the section number isn't known, and (b) if there were, it could presumably change before release. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 21 May 2009 07:17:05 UTC