Re: ReSpec updated

On Thu, 10 Mar 2016, at 19:53, Michael Cooper wrote:
> There are still changes impacting publication; this version is adding 
> "It is expected to become a W3C Note." for a Note-track document that 
> pubrules rejects; the previous version did not add that, and is accepted 
> by pubrules. This is the one giving me pain right now but there may be 
> others. The output of the new respec needs checking against pubrules 
> before it can be considered fixed. Michael

I'm sure a pull request fixing this would be most welcome. :)

--tobie