Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote: > Thanks for the pointer. I've diff'ed the Word versions of the ECMA > and Mozilla versions and confirmed that aside from the history section > there are only formatting and boiler-plate differences. I haven't done > a comprehensive diff between them but the formatting in the Mozilla > version closely matches the ISO version. > > I suggest that for the ES3.1 draft we apply the styles and formatting > from the Mozilla/ISO version as they appear to be more mature.
The Mozilla version has a much heavier font with a smaller interline spacing, that I find significantly less pleasant to read (even though I prefer sans-serif for technical documents in general). The lighter font in the 'NOTE' sections is more readable, although the interline spacing is still too small there. Also the italic and non-italic variants of the font are less clearly distinguished than in the ECMA version. -- David-Sarah Hopwood _______________________________________________ Es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
