- From: mozer <xmlizer@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 05:42:01 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Norm, I think this could be seen as a side effect of # ACTION-2008-08-28-03: Norm to review the kinds of nodes that are legal for all steps. Regards Xmlizer On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > The way group-adjacent is currently spec'd, it can only work for elements. > > Should we should fix that, or should we make it a dynamic error if a > none-element node is matched when group-adjacent is specified? > > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | There is nothing which human courage > http://nwalsh.com/ | will not undertake, and little that > | human patience will not endure.--Dr. > | Johnson >
Received on Sunday, 21 September 2008 03:42:38 UTC