- From: Shelby Moore <shelby@coolpage.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 00:46:31 -0400
- To: "Alan Gresley" <alan@css-class.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
> Shelby Moore wrote: >> [snip] >> >>> Maybe if we did that only to terms defined in that particular >>> module, it would be okay (possibly with an exception for CSS3 >>> Box, which defines most of those very common ones). >> >> And then add a standard Appendix to every CSS spec, Terms Defined >> Elsewhere. > > > This has nothing to do with the spec mentioned in this thread. I do not know where to post generalized suggestions that do affect this spec (and every other one too). > Shelby, can you please keep the person who you are replying to in your > reply since I have no clue to who you are replying too most of the > time. Backtracking through my inbox, I see this was a reply too > fantasai. I would expect something like the below in your reply which > my email client automatically generates. Look at the To: header on the email. Most email clients have a "show full headers" if the To: is not displayed by default. As the recipient of an email from the mailing list, you will be in X-Envelope-To:, and not the To: unless the email was sent to you and not the from the list.
Received on Sunday, 24 October 2010 04:46:58 UTC