Tag and Go

2 Comments

  1. JesseW September 22, 2007 @ 10:33 pm

    Related to US - 283, which says that the function definitions were unreadable.

    Substantive objection.

  2. Alan Bell September 23, 2007 @ 9:22 pm

    yes, I would say that US-283 was more about the readability of the PDF, the Australians seem to have been able to read it enough to decide they didn’t like what they saw, so this one is the issue of substance.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

  • Argentina (1)
  • Australia (30)
  • Austria (1)
  • Belgium (1)
  • Brazil (64)
  • Bulgaria (3)
  • Canada (79)
  • Chile (217)
  • China (1)
  • Colombia (237)
  • Czech Republic (75)
  • Denmark (168)
  • Ecma (76)
  • Ecuador (1)
  • Finland (15)
  • France (592)
  • Germany (162)
  • Ghana (12)
  • Greece (113)
  • India (82)
  • Iran (58)
  • Ireland (12)
  • Israel (33)
  • Italy (2)
  • Japan (82)
  • Jordan (1)
  • Kenya (81)
  • Malaysia (23)
  • Malta (5)
  • Mexico (7)
  • New Zealand (54)
  • Norway (12)
  • Peru (10)
  • Philippines (7)
  • Poland (4)
  • Portugal (118)
  • Singapore (2)
  • South Africa (17)
  • South Korea (25)
  • Spain (1)
  • Switzerland (19)
  • Thailand (1)
  • Tunisia (3)
  • Turkey (1)
  • UK (635)
  • Uruguay (18)
  • USA (288)
  • Venezuela (73)