XP> New Version of Document

XP> New Version of Document

don at lexmark.com don at lexmark.com
Fri Mar 8 10:05:59 EST 2002



Jun:

1) The word "Basic" was added to be consistent with the working in the XHTML
Basic document.  People were having trouble knowing what was and what was not
additional function on top of XHTML Basic.  I wanted to use **exactly** the same
wording as XHTML Basic to make sure it is absolutely clear.

2) Any Text Extension Modules we add will be above and beyond what is in XHTML
Basic so I put the asterisk there.  I could just as easily put it on each module
(e.g. Presentation).  It doesn't matter to me.  I wonder what the group thinks?

3) Accepted... my typos!  Thanks!

**********************************************
 Don Wright                 don at lexmark.com

 Member, IEEE SA Standards Board
 Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
 f.wright at ieee.org / f.wright at computer.org

 Director, Alliances & Standards
 Lexmark International
 740 New Circle Rd
 Lexington, Ky 40550
 859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
**********************************************



Jun Fujisawa <fujisawa.jun%canon.co.jp at interlock.lexmark.com> on 03/08/2002
02:10:42 AM

To:   "Don_Wright/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com
cc:   xp%pwg.org at interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  Re: XP> New Version of Document



Don,

At 3:34 PM -0500 02.3.7, don at lexmark.com wrote:
>I have uploaded a new version of XHTML-Print that reflects the changes and
>discussion we had at the LA meeting.

Thank you for keeping the spec up to date. Here are some minor errors
I found for XHTML-Print 0.951.

- In 4.1, the addition of "Basic" in the following titles is unnecessary
because these are the names of categories (please refer to "Modulariation
of XHTML"). They should be removed again.

3. Basic Table Modules
5. Basic Forms Modules

- In 4.1, the "*" at the end of "2. Text Extension Modules" should be
moved to the end of "Presentation" since the latter is the module name.

- In Table 1, "san serif" and "monospaced" in the description of 'font-family'
property should be "san-serif" and "monospace", respectively.


--
Jun Fujisawa
<mailto:fujisawa.jun at canon.co.jp>







More information about the Xp mailing list