W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > September 2007

Re: attention -- WG approval of 1.0 strategy

From: Ian B. Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 13:25:32 +0000
To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Cc: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1190208332.23800.301.camel@localhost>
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 15:19 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote:
> On Monday, September 10, 2007, 5:51:47 PM, Lofton wrote:
> 
> 
> LH> To summarize the below-linked minutes, our recommended strategy is to get
> LH> 4-week W3C/public review and publish the approved 1.0 errata document, but
> LH> to skip the hassle of republishing an entire new WebCGM 1.0 Third Release
> LH> document (Edited Recommendation).
> 
> >Today's minutes:
> >http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/WG/Minutes/2007/08/30-webcgm-minutes.html
> 
> I heard that the 'approved errata' option was being removed due to not being used. i have copied Ian Jacobs for an authoritative statement on whether that can still be used or not.
> 
> 
> Ian, this is a publicly archived list.

The option still exists; we have not yet modified the Process Document.
We plan to propose to the AC to remove that option (as it has not been
used).

I see above "to skip the hassle of republishing an entire new WebCGM 1.0
Third Release document" Please note that the process for approved
corrections does require publication within 6 months. Can the group
confirm here their intention to publish within 6 months after
the end of the formal review period?

 _ Ian

-- 
Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447

Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2007 13:25:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:19:10 GMT