[rfc-i] normative illustrations vs text
masinter at adobe.com
Fri Apr 27 02:34:30 PDT 2012
i think the problem was the phrase "have precedence" which I meant in a technical sense. If A has precedence over B, then only if they disagree, and then you should agree with A. I did not mean anything about relative scope, which could be anything.
Should I have linked to this definition?
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch at muada.com>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter at adobe.com>
Cc: "rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org" <rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org>
Sent: Fri, Apr 27, 2012 09:14:09 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] normative illustrations vs text
On 27 Apr 2012, at 11:05 , Larry Masinter wrote:
> i'll buy that the text must be complete and images need not.
> but if they *disagree* neither should have precedence.
I think that we agree then: if someone chooses to not look at the images but just the text then they don't miss anything that's required to implement the RFC, although they're probably making life harder for themselves.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest