[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: another nit

It's Ok by me to replace:

	Cords are not, strictly speaking, part of MCP 2.1, and
	compliant implementations are not required to support them.

with

	Compliant implementations are not required to support cords.

Modulo grammar.

Ay.

Erik Ostrom:
> 
> more in the stream of "we should've fixed this before calling it final
> but it's pretty minor so can we just do it?":
> 
> >Cords are not, strictly speaking, part of MCP 2.1, and compliant
> >implementations are not required to support them. 
> 
> of course, they ARE a part of mcp 2.1, or they wouldn't be in the spec
> and they wouldn't be called mcp-cord.  sure, they're an OPTIONAL part,
> but they're still there.
> 
> any objections to this change?