 | | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Your fresh eyes are very welcome. We had long discussions where sections of the spec were changed/moved/rewritten over and over, and I think there are some unnecessary repetions and redundacies, so a new full rewrite would be quite beneficial. (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Huh? Isn't NOCLIP/CLIP exactly for "un-commenting" a section (including subfile references) that hasn't been BFC checked? /Lars (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Are Meta-commands case-sensitive?
|
|
(...) L3P and L3Lab treat the FILE case-sensitive. (...) I think the "file type" meta-commands are the only ones that have been defined to NOT be case-sensitive. And yes, the "syntax" is a mess :-) (...) I agree. (...) L3P and L3Lab: MPD - (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Are Meta-commands case-sensitive?
|
|
I have a question about Meta-commands. Are meta-commands all supposed to be case-sensitive? As an example, is the 0 FILE MPD meta-command case-sensitive? I'm asking this because I have an MPD file that contains sub-files that themselves obviously (...) (22 years ago, 14-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Latest BFC Spec?
|
|
(...) This is really no different from the fact that the incoming certify state has to also be on. So a subfile won't be BFC'd unless all its parents are certified and it is certified as well. Also, presumably if you refer to a subfile in a section (...) (22 years ago, 13-Mar-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
