Re: Remarques on W3C Editor's Draft 13 November 2007

/ Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| == Aknowledgment ==
| I remember a telcon where Murray was asking for an aknowledgment section
| Is it planned to do it or not ?

It was fashionable for a while, but seems uncommon these days. I
thought we decided not to, but I don't feel strongly about it.

| == Typos ==
| s/alrogithms/algorithms/
| s/implemenation/implementation/
| s/inejcts/injects/
| s/otpions/options/
| s/resuing/reusing/
| s/separater/separator/
| s/specifiy/specify/
| s/turend/turned/
| s/an xPath 1.0/an XPath 1.0/

Thanks.

| == Ghosts ==
| XSLT2 is still remaining in examples
| XPath 1.0 is referenced almost everywhere (for p:when, p:xpath-context, etc...)

I think I've improved that in the (not yet published) 19 Nov draft.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | If you settle for what they're giving
http://nwalsh.com/            | you, you deserve what you get.