Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
In a message dated 25/05/2003 09:43:56 GMT Daylight Time, cowan@m... writes: As the Infoset says, infosets can be created in other ways than by John, I find that a slightly worrying approach to the interpretation of W3C specifications. Arguing from whitespace in a specification seems to me to be a pretty unreliable approach. Can one assume that an infoset can be a duck? :) .... I am not sure how an infoset looks, walks or talks (crucial criteria for Dare seemingly) .... but since the Infoset Rec doesn't have an exclusion clause to specify that it isn't a duck one can assume that it is? :) If the WG intended to say something significant about an/the infoset but failed to say it, then surely a short erratum would be in order? Andrew Watt
|
