call for 1.0 errata

WebCGM WG --

I have started the 1.0 errata document:
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/WG/2007/errata-10/webcgm10-errata-20070621.html

Please send (to me and WG list) any 1.0 errata you are aware of, whether 
significant or trivial editorial.

In skeleton form, I have included the first two definite errata, E01 and 
E02.  They need to be fleshed out considerably, so consider them mostly as 
placeholders for now.

I had a couple other ideas, E03 and E04.  I think E03 probably should be an 
erratum -- the 1.0 text about searching priorities, etc, should be 
clarified that it is "for example" , as 2.0 did (as opposed to some wooly 
sort of normative specification, as it could be read now.)

Upon further thought I think E04 -- correction of designation sequence 
tails for SF -- should *not* be an erratum, and should be dropped.  Looking 
at how we corrected the goof in 2.0 -- grandfathering the 1.0 form of the 
tail while requiring the corrected form for 2.0 -- to go back and correct 
it unambiguously in 1.0 would invalidate all presently valid 1.0 
content.  Bad idea, IMO.

-Lofton.