- From: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:13:31 -0700
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- CC: "Paul Nelson (ATC)" <paulnel@winse.microsoft.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
Daniel Glazman [mailto:daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com] wrote: >For one good reason at least : it's easy to name '::bound-element' >from a 'binding' property with a clear semantic relationshiop. >You can't do that with 'behavior'. Noted, and agreed. There's just no semantic relationship between the property 'binding', ::bound-element, and the title of the specification. >For one second good reason : it's conflicting with MSFT's property >and it's not specified the same way ! How so? In either case it is a URI, is it not, that points to a "behavior" (note quotes and lower case)? -Chris
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2007 21:15:23 UTC