- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 22:28:52 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004, Brad Fults wrote: > > In section 2.16 [1] of the Web Forms 2.0 draft there is the following note: > > "Note: These names, and their exact semantics, differ from those of the > equivalent attribute in XForms 1.0 (the replace attribute on the > submission element). The equivalent of this specification's document is > equivalent to the XForms all, and the equivalent of values is instance. > The equivalent of the XForms none value is document with the server > returning an HTTP 204 No Content return code." > > > "The equivalent of this specification's document is equivalent to the > > XForms all..." > > This seems redundant and awkward. Instead one might consider something > like, "The equivalent of document in this specification is all in > XForms..." or something to that effect. Good idea, thanks. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 16 December 2004 14:28:52 UTC