Re: Definition of "semantics"

>> Sure. Let's have dueling experts.
>
> You start the "experts parade" with hot and sexy drawings

I trust you read the rest of my paragraph?

> But, I don't see the WG blocking any effort to advance in this case.

Well, I'd love that to be the case.

> Expect criticism if you come up with 42s, lol.

404s, shurely?!

> Well, for the record: Jason and I made our points, I guess.

Jason wrote something? I'm sure it's on topic and relevant and will be 
immediately taken up by the rest of the group.

-- 

     Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
     Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
       --This.
       --What's wrong with top-posting?

Received on Monday, 13 June 2005 15:21:56 UTC