- From: fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>
- Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 18:57:54 -0700
- To: www-style@w3.org
On 05/21/2014 01:43 PM, Simon Sapin wrote: > On 21/05/2014 19:51, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> But also has been discussed as a generalized way to fit conceptual named >>> combinators like it. >> And in particular, is the/deep/ combinator. Simon, mind reverting >> your removal? > > Oh, I didn’t remember /deep/. Done. Didn't we just agree to rename /deep/ to >>>? ~fantasai
Received on Thursday, 22 May 2014 01:58:31 UTC