Re: Editor's review copy of XML Namespaces 1.0 Third Edition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Grosso, Paul writes:

> It generally looks good (not counting the front matter, of course).

Front matter now done, sorry to have not got that in place before.

> 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.

Hmm.  That's NPE29 [1], which I _thought_ we had approved. . .  Yes,
we did [2], I just failed to update the NPE and add an actual erratum
- -- done now.

> 2.  In Appendix F, you did not include in the PER the Note in
>     the erratum that explains production [6].  I think you should,
>     as even though I was present during the WG discussion, I had
>     already forgotten the explanation as to how production [6] works,
>     and I couldn't re-figure it out without reading the Note.

Oversight on my part, now included.

[1] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.html#NPE29
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0051.html
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
                         Half-time member of W3C Team
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFKZyCvkjnJixAXWBoRAs3TAJ9tpVmA3ebq7/WYlO7Q8vuIQB4EXQCfQAlZ
yEY2epKNBb3vln2CCUxz8fQ=
=O7Si
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Wednesday, 22 July 2009 14:23:17 UTC