Conversation
Relequestual
left a comment
Relequestual
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was still unsure about the specific phrasing, but on reflection I think it does make sense and communicates the correct meaning and requirements.
jdesrosiers
left a comment
jdesrosiers
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Honestly, this still feels unclear to me. Readers have to make the connection that "implicitly defined" means that it's considered "recognized" by the implementation. I think it would be a lot easier on readers if we use the same terms in all the places we talk about this.
jdesrosiers
left a comment
jdesrosiers
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
After discussion about avoiding the "recognized" ambiguity elsewhere, I'm no longer concerned about using that word in this section.
|
(Ref: #1512 (comment)) |
|
Still going to pull these changes in since I think the wording is a bit cleaner, even if it doesn't solve the original ask. That ask will be resolved as part of #1512. |
4 participants
Per this Slack thread, we felt that the wording here doesn't do enough to describe "x-" keywords as "known" keywords.