- From: Yuvalik Webdesign <postmaster@yuvalik.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:17:48 +0300
> From: Ian Hickson > > > > Anyway, Perhaps this will do? > > > > "If a transparent element were to be removed but its descendants were > > kept as they are, the content should remain conformant." > > > > Or: > > > > "Any transparent content should be conformant as if its transparent > > containing element did not exist." > > Unfortunately both of these can be interpreted as saying that the > element > and all its children disappear -- "kept as they are" implies kept as > children of the element; "[parent] element did not exist" implies the > kids > aren't in the tree, etc. > > > > But again, perhaps the added example makes things clear enough. Just > > trying to help. > > Your help is much appreciated. I'm glad the example helps. > I'll give it one more go. ;-) Perhaps you could leave the existing sentence, but add: "In short; a transparent element must have the same content model as its parent." Or something to that effect? Evert
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 06:17:48 UTC