W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > September 2008

Re: determining an xproc extension attributes

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:41:32 +0100
To: "James Fuller" <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com>
Cc: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>, public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5by71ybsgj.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

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

James Fuller writes:

> I agree with both yours and Mohamed point ... and yes I have read
> these sections a few times and understand how things are supposed to
> work; I still think there is a contradiction between the 2 sections I
> quoted.

The WG proposes to change 'recognize' to 'implement' in section 3.8 --
would that remove the contradiction you see?  If not, please suggest
what would do so.

Thanks,

ht
- -- 
       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)

iD8DBQFIyTwskjnJixAXWBoRAp4EAJsEExZw6ln2iGjDBeUmRythYNaa/QCfczbM
jffj06EcshoQ+64G5uaBhFw=
=wPW/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2008 15:42:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:41:08 UTC