- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 19:41:17 +0200
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org, "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 18:55:15 +0200, Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Liam R E Quin [mailto:liam@w3.org] > Sent: Thursday, 2010 July 01 9:47 > To: Grosso, Paul > Cc: Norman Walsh; Philipp Hoschka; timbl@w3.org; plh@w3.org; > w3t-archive@w3.org > Subject: Re: Taking Associating Stylesheets Second Edition to PER [was: > Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2010 June 30] > > (sorry to be brief, in a rush to get to the train!) > > I met with Tim this morning; he'd like > > Add to the document, e.g. in the Applications para > At the time of edition 1 (1999) the meaning of these p-attributes was > not well specified, Appendix B already states: "The first edition of this specification was admirably brief, but at the same time left many details unstated." > and at the time of edition 2 (2010) there is low > interoperability in the values between implementations; How do we assess that there is low interoperability in the values between implementations? > future work may > clarify this. > > check with Daniel Glassman. > > If Daniel is OK, the spec can go forward. > > We need also to contact browser vendors and see if they are willing > to sit round a table & get conformance/semantics pinned down in a > future edition. Hmm. I work for a browser vendor. I joined this group in the hope to get conformance/semantics pinned down. But the WG consensus was to not have any conformance requirements at all. -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 6 July 2010 17:42:07 UTC