fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net> wrote: > <Bert> If we want to re-publish CSS 2.1, we can do that , too. > <Bert> (as long as we make only editorial changes, but that is indeed > the case here.) > <anne> i guess we have to wait another week to decide on publishing > CSS 2.1? <Bert> Yes,we need a recorded WG decision. > <anne> ok, lets wait for that then > <anne> that gives people some time to study my email too, if anyone > does What's the status of the core lexer revisions to avoid arbitrary back-up? It was agreed on in an WG meeting, but then it was disputed quite contentiously on this list, and I realized my original proposal didn't do the job and sent in a revision (sorry about that). It would be nice to have a definite resolution one way or the other. zwReceived on Wednesday, 26 August 2009 20:31:22 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:07:38 UTC