- 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