- From: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 18:29:06 +0100
- To: Tobie Langel <tobie.langel@gmail.com>
- CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Shane P McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, "spec-prod@w3.org Prod" <spec-prod@w3.org>, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
On 22/12/2014 18:07 , Tobie Langel wrote: > On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org > <mailto:robin@w3.org>> wrote: > > Yes, that could very easily be the cause of the problem. In fact, > I'm pretty sure it was: I just made a change that ought to fix that. > > I was actually wondering why that changed had been made and thought > there was a valid reason to move it back. > > Should have asked on the PR. > > Mea culpa. I read through the same code and thought that it might make sense to have dfn processing happen earlier. So that's that. Inclusion is a brittle, rarely used, and undertested feature. Unless we get a lot more tests for it it's likely not the last time we break it a bit... -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Monday, 22 December 2014 17:29:17 UTC