- From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
- Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 00:25:00 +0100
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote: > Personally, I would recommend to the editors remove the sentence > saying that the XMLNames11 terminology is being used, and instead > define their own terminology (keeping the terms as compatible as > possible, preferably identical, of course). This last seems very odd to me, suggesting that the motivation is political rather than a desire for clarity. If the authors are to use terminology identical to that of XMLNames11, then why should they not be open about so doing ? If you asked them to add a note to the effect that "the use of this terminology is in no way intended to restrict this document to the application of CSS to XML", I would have no concerns at all, but to ask them to use a terminology /identical/ to that of XMLNames11 whilst at the same time asking them to delete the explicit reference to the source of said terminology seems a little perverse ... Philip Taylor
Received on Sunday, 10 September 2006 23:25:05 UTC