W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > February 2013

Re: HTTP Forms Extension Specification

From: Cameron Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:10:23 +0000
Message-ID: <CALGrgevXt7ggrN2ZAkbp-Vezf+r8roo=8TKdHnU3yVijOP7xgw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Cc: "public-html-admin@w3.org" <public-html-admin@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>wrote:

>  > Sure, that sounds great. I coined the shortname
> "form-http-extentions", if suitable.
>
> ****
>
> I expect that “form-http” might be a better, easier to remember and type
> shortname since you yourself mis-spelt “extensions” in the above text!
> ;<)  But if you want to stick with the longer form “form-http-extensions”
> it is fine by me.
>

D'oh! Yes, shorter is fine by me.


> ****
>
> ** **
>
> I will let you know when we get the Bugzilla Component setup.****
>
> ** **
>
> /paulc****
>
> ** **
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada****
>
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3****
>
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Cameron Jones [mailto:cmhjones@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 22, 2013 9:42 AM
> *To:* Paul Cotton
> *Cc:* public-html-admin@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: HTTP Forms Extension Specification****
>
> ** **
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
> wrote:****
>
> First, I would like to encourage you to start a discussion on
> public-html@w3.org along the lines of the thread that Sylvia started on
> her proposal:****
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2013Feb/0210.html****
>
>
> Apologies, every time i start a new thread it seems to be the wrong place!
> I think i have it clarified now.
>  ****
>
>   ****
>
> Second, in anticipation of needing to handle bugs on this proposed
> extension spec would you like us to create a Component in the HTML WG
> Bugzilla Product for this specification?****
>
>
> Sure, that sounds great. I coined the shortname "form-http-extentions", if
> suitable.
>
> i've categorized the extension specification as 'unofficial' as i thought
> this was correct prior to any publication as a technical report.
>
> Thanks,
> Cameron Jones ****
>
Received on Friday, 22 February 2013 16:10:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 February 2013 16:10:55 GMT