- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 18:43:51 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 24 May 2007, Nicholas Shanks wrote: > > Various people have expressed opinions in favour of either one spec to > rule them all, or two specs for different audiences. Is not the simplest > solution to have two views upon the same spec? No, it's certainly not the _simplest_ solution. It's _a_ solution, yes. It's been considered and might even happen. It's a MASSIVE amount of work, though. For example, it's also not always clear how to categorise the text. What would you do with: <p>If a <code>dl</code> element contains only <code>dd</code> elements, then it consists of one group with values but no names, and the document is non-conforming.</p> Should that be shown in the cut down "author" version? There are also a number of sentences that would need to be rewritten so they still make sense with parts of the sentences hidden. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2007 11:43:51 UTC