W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > July 2006

Re: Fwd: [LC Review]

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:01:03 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>,WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>

It would be easy enough to resolve the comment with a new sentence to begin 
the Abstract, something like:  "WebCGM is a graphics standard optimized for 
Web applications in technical electronic documents, geophysical data 
visualization, and similar fields."  And lightly edit the current first 
paragraph of the Abstract to make it flow better.


At 10:56 AM 7/24/2006 -0400, Benoit Bezaire wrote:
>This is a forwarded message
>From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
>To: public-webcgm@w3.org
>Date: Friday, July 21, 2006, 5:15:53 AM
>Subject: [LC Review]
>===8<==============Original message text===============
>One thing that struck me was how far you have to read before you find out
>what WebCGM actually is. I think that at very least the abstract should
>say what it is. For the uninitiated it is not until section 1.4 that you
>start getting an inkling that it is something to do with 2D graphics.
>Steven Pemberton
>===8<===========End of original message text===========
>I don't have a strong opinion about this. If Steven would have clicked
>on 'second (errata) release in 2001' found in the Abstract, he would
>have found the information he was looking for. On the other hand, a
>few more lines in the abstract would be easy enough to add.
>  Benoit                            mailto:benoit@itedo.comReceived: from 
> frink.w3.org [] by mail.itedo.com with ESMTP
>   (SMTPD-8.22) id AB6B0310; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 02:16:27 -0700
>Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50)
>         id 1G3r7R-0007dI-Fe
>         for public-webcgm-dist@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:16:25 
> +0000
>Received: from maggie.w3.org ([])
>         by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
>         id 1G3r7P-0007bh-I3
>         for public-webcgm@listhub.w3.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:16:23 +0000
>Received: from homer.w3.org ([])
>         by maggie.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
>         id 1G3r7I-0001sc-Ct
>         for public-webcgm@w3.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:16:18 +0000
>Received: from acer3010.ins.cwi.nl (homer.w3.org [])
>         by homer.w3.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362A04F1D8
>         for <public-webcgm@w3.org>; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 05:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
>Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 11:15:53 +0200
>To: public-webcgm@w3.org
>From: "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
>Organization: CWI/W3C
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-15
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Message-ID: <op.tc070rolsmjzpq@acer3010.ins.cwi.nl>
>User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.00 (Win32)
>Received-SPF: none (maggie.w3.org: domain of steven.pemberton@cwi.nl does 
>not designate permitted sender hosts)
>X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
>X-W3C-Scan-Sig: maggie.w3.org 1G3r7I-0001sc-Ct 
>X-Original-To: public-webcgm@w3.org
>Subject: [LC Review]
>X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/op.tc070rolsmjzpq@acer3010.ins.cwi.nl
>Resent-From: public-webcgm@w3.org
>X-Mailing-List: <public-webcgm@w3.org> archive/latest/9
>X-Loop: public-webcgm@w3.org
>Sender: public-webcgm-request@w3.org
>Resent-Sender: public-webcgm-request@w3.org
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: <public-webcgm.w3.org>
>List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:public-webcgm-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>Resent-Message-Id: <E1G3r7R-0007dI-Fe@frink.w3.org>
>Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:16:25 +0000
>X-RCPT-TO: <benoit@itedo.com>
>Status: U
>X-UIDL: 433560421
>X-IMail-ThreadID: 9b6b042b00000c82
Received on Tuesday, 25 July 2006 17:01:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:23:38 UTC