- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 09:43:18 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
> -----Original Message----- > From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xml-core-wg- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Grosso, Paul > Sent: Wednesday, 2009 July 22 8:24 > To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: Editor's review copy of XML Namespaces 1.0 Third Edition > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xml-core-wg- > > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Henry S. Thompson > > Sent: Wednesday, 2009 July 22 7:33 > > To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > > Subject: Editor's review copy of XML Namespaces 1.0 Third Edition > > > > Now available, in plain and diffed versions. Please review carefully: > > > > > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/04/xml-names-2e/xml-names-10-3e.html > > > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/04/xml-names-2e/xml-names-10-3e-diff.ht > ml > Comparing the diff version with the errata document, I note: > > 1. We turned "attributes unique" into an NSC, but there is no > corresponding erratum for this. This doesn't really bother > me, but I thought I'd mention it. I found the "problem". NPE29 at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.html#NPE29 was never reflected in the Errata document at http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/xml-names-errata That NPE should have its Status updated to indicate it was resolved and published as erratum Nexx to edition 1.0-2, and the Errata document needs to have that erratum added to it (and that document's date should be updated accordingly). paul
Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 13:44:42 UTC