RE: [2.4] Updated proposal for GL 2.4

Jason writes:
<blockquote>
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Sailesh Panchang wrote:

> If content does not comply with 1.3 SC 1, it cannot claim conformance 
> with all level 1 SC  anyway. I do not see the point of repeating the 
> same SC here under 2.4.

This has generated a lot of opposition in the teleconferences and on the
list.

Here is a suggestion, for now, let's make it a cross-reference to 1.3 L
1 SC 1.
</blockquote>
I agree that we should make this a cross-reference. And let's do it in a
way that conforms to 1.3. Does the DTD include a crossreference
attribute or linktype that's different from a simple link to a named
anchor?

John

Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2004 00:09:31 UTC