- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:44:56 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29702 --- Comment #4 from Michael Dyck <jmdyck@ibiblio.org> --- (In reply to Abel Braaksma from comment #3) > (In reply to Michael Dyck from comment #2) > > > > > > 3) Leave section A.1 as the Normative EBNF. > > > > But if A,1 is the normative EBNF, shouldn't we still say that it is? > Yes, I thought that was the idea. But point #1 says to remove the sentence that asserts that the appendix is the normative version of the EBNF. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2016 18:45:06 UTC