RE: Defined sets, accept sets, and <banana> elements

I agree that the definition of "ignore" needs elaboration.  I think
there are at least 2 major flavours: ignore and delete, and ignore and
retain.  

Given that you agree that "weaving" is a good next step, what do you
think about "weaving" by reference to a micro-finding rather than
weaving into the text?  

Cheers,
Dave 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 1:01 PM
> To: David Orchard
> Cc: Tim Berners-Lee; www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Defined sets, accept sets, and <banana> elements
> 
> David Orchard wrote:
> 
> > I had an action item, either official or unofficial, to 
> weave a story 
> > like this into the finding.  I suggested to you and the tag 
> that your 
> > material could be either incorporated into the finding or as a 
> > separate micro-finding, and that I'd do any extra work 
> required.  You 
> > didn't support either of those options,
> 
> To be clear, you are welcome to "weave" what I wrote into the 
> finding if you think that's the right next step.  I was 
> merely suggesting a direction that I thought would be 
> interesting, and that would involve doing a bit more 
> investigation and consensus building before we decide what to 
> put in the finding.  One way or the other, I strongly believe 
> that we need to think hard about, and probably tell a story 
> in the finding about, languages which have semantics other 
> than "ignore" for extension content. 
> By all means, if you think my email is the right basis for 
> telling that story, then integrate it, and we'll see what the 
> reaction is.  Sorry if my original email was confusing.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Noah Mendelsohn
> IBM Corporation
> One Rogers Street
> Cambridge, MA 02142
> 1-617-693-4036
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>
> 06/21/2007 03:17 PM
>  
>         To:     <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
>         cc:     "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>
>         Subject:        RE: Defined sets, accept sets, and <banana> 
> elements
> 
> 
> I had an action item, either official or unofficial, to weave a story
> like this into the finding.  I suggested to you and the tag that your
> material could be either incorporated into the finding or as 
> a separate
> micro-finding, and that I'd do any extra work required.  You didn't
> support either of those options, so I'm not interested in duplicating
> such work by completing my action using separate material.
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com 
> [mailto:noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com] 
> > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 12:14 PM
> > To: David Orchard
> > Cc: Tim Berners-Lee; www-tag@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Defined sets, accept sets, and <banana> elements
> > 
> > David Orchard writes:
> > 
> > > I had an action item, either official or unofficial, to 
> > weave a story 
> > > like this into the finding.  I think that action is now closed..
> > 
> > Well, I've suggested a direction for deciding what to do, but 
> > it's just my opinion.  Are you suggesting that you are going 
> > to go through the steps I suggested and update the finding 
> > depending on what results?  Thanks.
> > 
> > Noah
> > 
> > --------------------------------------
> > Noah Mendelsohn
> > IBM Corporation
> > One Rogers Street
> > Cambridge, MA 02142
> > 1-617-693-4036
> > --------------------------------------
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 20:59:27 UTC