On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 15:55 -0500, Harry Halpin wrote: > Jeremy, > > The final decision in DanC's hands, but we already decided as a WG > not to use conformance labels. Er... my suggestion is to put it back in the WG's hands, but I suppose it's good to know if Jeremy is OK with not adding a conformance label... > However, we do want implementers to be > aware of security issues. So, if that text was added to section 7 as > informative text and we substituted the words "GRDDL-aware agent" for > "GRDDL-aware processor", would you feel like your comment has been > addressed? -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29EReceived on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 21:18:23 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:42 GMT