- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:19:16 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29700 Michael Dyck <jmdyck@ibiblio.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jmdyck@ibiblio.org --- Comment #1 from Michael Dyck <jmdyck@ibiblio.org> --- (In reply to Abel Braaksma from comment #0) > > Essentially, such comment is not a comment. Right. More precisely, that sequence of characters is not a Comment. So it is unaffected by rules about Comments. > Perhaps a better wording would be to say: > > <proposal> > Comments are not recognized as comments in these productions I don't think that's an improvement, as it implies that something can be a comment and yet not be 'recognized as' a comment. I agree that the 'ws: explicit' blurb could probably be improved, but I don't think that's how to do it. (Personally, I'd be okay with removing the sentence "Comments are also not allowed in these productions", since I believe that's covered by "A.2.4.1 does not apply", but we probably added it for a reason. I'll look into that.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2016 14:19:31 UTC