W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > August 2008

Re: [Draft] Pre announcement for WebCGM 2.1 to a First Public and Last Call Working Draft.

From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:21:57 +0200
Message-ID: <48B6C295.1080400@w3.org>
To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
CC: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>, David Cruikshank <dvdcruikshank@gmail.com>, Don <don@cgmlarson.com>

Lofton,
>> We plan on having a 2 months review period, ending on November 15th 
>> 2008. Does any WG request more time than that?
> 
> We will of course have to adjust the start and finish somewhat, after we 
> sort out our startup schedule.  But one initial thought:  I think we 
> should close a bit earlier, if we anticipate a f2f Nov.19-21.  I think 
> that 10-14 days before would be better.  For example, if the f2f were 
> Wed-Fri, then close something like Friday Nov.7, which is a 
> week-and-a-half earlier.
> 
> Reason.  It gives us a chance to clarify and pre-negotiate any other 
> WG's comments.  And maybe will help avoid a situation like last time, 
> where we got comments just before the end of the Cologne F2F!


OK.

> 
> More...
> 
> 
>> WebCGM has dependencies with the following working groups, as 
>> mentioned in its charter:
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/10/webcgm-charter.html
>>
>> *Internationalization Core Working Group
>> * Synchronized Multimedia Working Group
>> * Scalable Vector Graphics Working Group
> 
> Looking at the charter, the motivation for SMIL & SVG are tied to 
> animation.  We had declarative animation in the requirements as a 
> "maybe".  But we flagged it as probably beyond the scope of 2.1, and 
> indeed that is how we are progressing.
> 
> Question.  How does the postponement of declarative animation affect the 
> SVG and SMIL dependencies?  (Should the pre-announce mention it?)  Note 
> that there are some "hooks" that have been put into 2.1 that allow DOM 
> script writers to more easily produce certain kinds of simple animation 
> effects.
> 
> Comments anyone?

I had not mention on purpose,  the type of dependencies for each working 
group, for that specific reason ;-).
Received on Thursday, 28 August 2008 15:22:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 28 August 2008 15:22:46 GMT