<MikeSmith> hsivonen: you there?
<MikeSmith> hsivonen: I notice that the whattf.org schema has both common.data.float and form.data.float, and that microsyntaxes for them differ
<MikeSmith> but the spec has only one definition for "valid floating point number"
<MikeSmith> which form.data.float matches, but common.data.float does not
<MikeSmith> so it seems like there only needs to be just one *.data.float pattern defined, and its definition should match the current form.data.float one
<MikeSmith> same for common.data.float.positive and form.data.float.positive
<MikeSmith> and it seems that the definition for common.data.float.non-negative needs to be revised also
<MikeSmith> so, specifically that there should just be one definition for each, and that there definitions should be w:float-exp, w:float-exp-positive, with the new addition of w:float-exp-non-negative
<MikeSmith> anyway, I'll file a bug at bugzilla.validator.nu
<MikeSmith> also, as far as the definition of float, the spec allows either "E" or "e", but the regexp in the schema comment restricts it to "e" only