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

Re: process and milestones for moving WebCGM 2.0 to LC.

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 15:29:20 +0200
Message-ID: <197882571.20060607152920@w3.org>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Cc: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>, public-webcgm-wg@w3.org

On Wednesday, June 7, 2006, 2:13:51 AM, Lofton wrote:

LH> I realize that this might have been a little hard to parse and understand...

LH> At 03:27 PM 6/6/2006 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>>[...]
>>I was just about to hit 'send' on the "WebCGM 2.0 Last Call Review 
>>Schedule" to Chairs and dependency WGs.  But then I'm thinking... should 
>>that (LCWD) follow the FPWD Transition Request, which is also Cc: to 
>>Chairs?  Or maybe, to preempt confusion, should I put a note in LCWD 
>>message (then send it) acknowledging the odd order of things when FPWD and 
>>LCWD coincide, and preview that FPWD Tr.Req. message will follow soon?  Or 
>>not worry about it at all?

LH> So what I was proposing in the 2nd option ("to preempt confusion") is 
LH> augmenting the 3rd paragraph of the letter, which currently reads:

LH> [[[
LH> This LC Working Draft is based, in large part, on a work by the same name,
LH> WebCGM 2.0 an OASIS Committee Specification [2] submitted to W3C as WebCGM
LH> 2.0 Submission[3]. This Member Submission is related to the previous W3C
LH> work on WebCGM 1.0 [4], and draws on experiences with that format from 
LH> implementors and users over five years. This Working Draft incorporates 
LH> feedback and discussion following the Submission.
LH> ]]]

LH> by adding for example, "(Note.  Because of the relatively unusual way that
LH> this entered the W3C Process, you will also soon be seeing a First Public
LH> WD Transition Request.)"  Then send it without waiting for the telecon, 
LH> resolution, minutes, and FPWD request.

Don't do that. The AC has already agreed that the charter of the group is
to take the submission to last call. No need to send up red flags about
"relatively unusual".

LH> Yes?  No?  Other?

LH> -Lofton.



-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Interaction Domain Leader
 Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:29:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:19:08 GMT