- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 09:37:16 +0100
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:22:53 +0200, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote: > "The xml-stylesheet processing instruction is parsed in the same way as > a start-tag, with the exception that entities other than predefined > entities must not be referenced." > > I think this paragraph is not so suitable in the Abstract, and certainly > shouldn't use "must not". This was changed. > "The key words must, must not and may in the normative parts of this > document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119, these words do > not appear in all uppercase letters in this specification. [RFC 2119]" > > I think this statement is usually placed under Conformance requirements, > however I guess that doesn't matter much. Moved to conformance requirements. > "A pseudo-attribute has a name and a value:" > > name and value should probably be links. Done. > "[Definition: The string matched by the Name symbol in the PseudoAtt > production above constitutes the name of the > correspondingpseudo-attribute]" > > Missing space. Fixed. > "[Definition: A processing instruction that is a child of a document but > does not appear after the element child of the document and has the > target xml-stylesheet is a processing instruction with > pseudo-attributes, and is said to be an xml-stylesheet processing > instruction ] unless the conditions specified in 4 Processing > instructions with pseudo-attributes require it to be ignored." > > I think the trailing "unless..." should be part of the definition. This is now moot. > "[6] StyleSheetPI ::= "<?xml-stylesheet" (S PIContent)? "?>"" > > This should be production [1], per previous discussion. This was changed. > "A References (Non-Normative)" > > All references except [HTML] should be normative. Fixed. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 08:38:04 UTC