- From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 11:19:12 +0100 (CET)
- To: "Lofton Henderson" <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Cc: "Thierry Michel" <tmichel@w3.org>, "WebCGM WG" <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
> Thierry, > > I think option #1 is ruled out. The test suite is incomplete and > implementations are very incomplete. I guess we could actually have a > very > long CR, but we would surely return to LC thereafter (then maybe go > straight to PR). And ... I don't think anyone believes that the spec is > stable yet. > > I think #2 sounds best. We would publish a new WD to incorporate the LC > feedback, then continue with spec development in the WG (and have a 2nd LC > "in a while"). > > If we did option #3, then it would be almost 6 months between publishing > 1st LC and the next publication (2nd LC). Would that be problematic to > have no publication for that long? > > -Lofton. Well it would not be problematic, but W3C recommends to publish every 3 months (which a lot of WGs don't do). I am fine with option 2, to publish a new Working Draft and then publish a second last Call in a few months. Sorry for my previous emails, my emailer went wrong and sent multiple message Sorry for the buzz. -- Thierry Michel W3C
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 10:19:49 UTC