RE: WG assignments -- WebCGM 1.0 Errata review

Comments on E06
The links to 3.1.2.4 and 3.2.1.1 in the para under "Overview" are
broken.
In the "Proposed fix",it should read "Delete the bullet list in secction
3.2.1.1" (instead of 3.2.1.4, link is ok)

Comments on E07 
Looks ok.

Dave

Technical Fellow - Graphics/Digital Data Interchange
Boeing Commercial Airplane
206.544.3560, fax 206.662.3734
david.w.cruikshank@boeing.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:07 AM
To: WebCGM WG
Subject: WG assignments -- WebCGM 1.0 Errata review


Hi All,

I want to make a small assignment for each WG participant, to be
completed before the Thursday telecon.

I realize that the 1.0 errata document [1] has grown to be bulky, and it
may be daunting if you're busy.  Therefore, I'd like to have each person
review two errata, okay?

To remind you of present status... The WebCGM WG approved the substance
(and Class) of all of the errata solutions at the 8/30 telecon [2] (and
the WebCGM TC approved the same substance earlier at its f2f).

So your job is to check that the completed text in the document [1]
correctly implements our approved resolutions, and to check for
editorial errors.

Chris -- E01 (URI/IRI)
Dieter -- E02, E03
Benoit -- E04, E05
Dave -- E06, E07
Stuart -- E08, E09
Don -- E10, E11

It would be good to email your review ("okay" or corrections),
especially if you will not be present Thursday.  Feel free to review
other ones in addition to your assigment.

Thanks in advance,
-Lofton.

At 04:09 PM 9/6/2007 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>WebCGM WG --
>
>This should implement all of the decisions that we made at the 8/30 
>telecon (and before):
>http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/WG/2007/errata-10/WebCGM10-errata-200
>70621.html
>
>It is ready for final editorial approval, which we will do at the 9/13 
>telecon.  Please have a careful look at it before then, and send any 
>comments to this list.  Are there any substantial errors in 
>implementing our decisions?  Any editorial corrections?
>
>After approval, it will have a 4-week (public) review, as it contains a

>couple of Class 3 corrections.
>
>Regards,
>-Lofton.
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2007 17:52:40 UTC