- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:49:47 +0100
- To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>, public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:35:24 +0100, Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote: >> >> "The productions in this specification use the same notation as used >> in >> >> the XML specification [XML]. Symbols in the grammar that are not >> >> defined >> >> in this specification are defined in the XML specification." >> >> Forgot to comment on this part. The question is not moot since the >> paragraph quoted above is still in the draft (in the terminology >> section; > > I missed that. I guess I'd change "Symbols" to "Tokens" there > unless someone else has a better suggestion or strong opinion. Done. >> maybe that's out of place, maybe the terminology and conformance >> sections >> should be merged, since infoset and XML are more of dependencies than >> mere terminology). > > I think the terminology and conformance sections are good > separated as they are. I merged them earlier today, but let's see what others think. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2009 06:50:26 UTC