RE: rq23 grammar update

On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 15:35 +0100, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> I'm not disagreeing - publishing all the grammar we have is a good
> thing.  Why is my suggestion - which was just supposed to be more detail
> on yours - wrong?  Put grammars in a directory near the rec and link to
> them.

OK, I misread your message. Sorry.

so... something like rq23/gr24/*

you could call them rq23/grammar/* but then people might assume
from the URI that they're normative grammar representations, but
as you say, we're not sure to what extent we can vouch for them...

> I'd be happier if I could get a positive confirmation that they had all
> run the test suite.  
> 	Andy
Dan Connolly, W3C
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Tuesday, 30 August 2005 16:11:35 UTC