- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 02:38:15 +0000 (UTC)
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Lachlan Hunt wrote: > > > So, given that it already states the conforming content model is the same > > > as that of its parent element, I don't see how that is an additional > > > restriction at all. > > > > Consider: > > > > <aside> > > <noscript> > > <em>Text</em> > > </noscript> > > <noscript> > > <p>Text</p> > > </noscript> > > </aside> > > I see. How about including that example in the spec and rephrasing first > additional requirement like this: > > * Replacing each noscript element with its child elements must not > cause the document to become non-conforming. I think this is all covered now by the new "transparent" text. Do you agree? I do think we'll still have to add examples, but I'm going to wait for now because I expect to do a pass one day adding examples everywhere. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 6 August 2007 19:38:15 UTC