- From: <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 20:49:46 -0400
- To: www-dom@w3.org
Actually, if some cases are live and others aren't... this looks like your real intent was to say "look, since it makes implementation easier, you can just iterate off the list of kids; that will be live, which has some hazards, but we're willing to write that into the spec and require it (for portability)." IF that was what you had in mind -- if liveness was permissible in this case rather than being philosophically required, and then made official so applications could count on consistant behavior -- the doc should probably come right out and say it. Some of us are used to language specs which are written with a Strong Philosophy of the Ideal Language, and as a result we tend to read any statement in the spec as having very strong connotations as well as denotations. If you don't want us to take it that way, please indicate that it's commentary and/or compromise -- or us language lawyers will debate it to death. Q: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? A: In theory: As many as want to. In practice: Only as many as will fit.
Received on Monday, 27 July 1998 20:48:32 UTC