Re: Agenda of 3 January 2006 TAG teleconference

On Jan 03, 2006, at 18:13, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote:
> You're probably right.  Then again, I think there's a point of view  
> that
> even when the piece parts are combined by reference, the overall  
> semantic
> of the document results from the combination, just as it does when
> combining by nesting (inclusion).  As I understand it, CDF is on a  
> path to
> saying that event propagation, layout, etc. are essentially the  
> same in
> the two cases.   That symmetry gives me some pause.

As one participant in the CDF WG and not speaking for the group, I  
would certainly welcome the TAG's input, decisive or discursive, on  
whether inclusion and reference may/should/must (not) behave, look,  
and mean the same.

-- 
Robin Berjon
    Senior Research Scientist
    Expway, http://expway.com/

Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 17:49:43 UTC