Could the resolution of Issue 333 [3] have a bearing on the handling of this issue? Nilo [3] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x333 <http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x333> -----Original Message----- From: Martin Gudgin [mailto:mgudgin@microsoft.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 3:54 PM To: Nilo Mitra (EUS); Jean-Jacques Moreau; Marc Hadley; Noah Mendelson; Henrik Frystyk Nielsen Cc: W3C Public Archive Subject: RE: Is LC issue 309 misdirected at Primer? I agree this is a comment on the spec in general. It is also a dupe ( of Issue 277[2] ) Gudge [2] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x277 <http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x277> -----Original Message----- From: Nilo Mitra (EUS) [mailto:Nilo.Mitra@am1.ericsson.se] Sent: 03 September 2002 20:36 To: Nilo Mitra (EUS); 'Jean-Jacques Moreau'; Martin Gudgin; 'Marc Hadley'; 'Noah Mendelson'; Henrik Frystyk Nielsen Cc: 'W3C Public Archive' Subject: Is LC issue 309 misdirected at Primer? Gentlemen: Might perhaps LC issue 309 [1] be a more general matter, and misdirected at Part0: Primer by mistake? (The remainder of the originator's comments are on the Primer, from which this one is an excerpt.) Please clarify, Thanks Nilo [1] http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x309 <http://www.w3.org/2000/xp/Group/xmlp-lc-issues.html#x309>
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 16:16:09 UTC