W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > August 2009

RE: NS 1.0 3rd Ed draft

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 13:16:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D3021066DD51@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@inf.ed.ac.uk]
> Sent: Monday, 2009 August 03 5:51
> To: Grosso, Paul
> Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: NS 1.0 3rd Ed draft
> Grosso, Paul writes:
> > I'm not really sure what to do here.
> >
> > We had said we would publish a pre-PER draft, so I don't really want
> > to submit a PER pub request, but what do I want to submit?
> Aren't you gettting confused with what we agreed wrt the Stylesheet PI
> work?  All the changes to Namespaces are small, and have been
> published as errata, so there's no problem with going straight to PER.

Right, I was confused.  Unfortunately...

> > We can put a publicly accessible draft in XML/2009/* and announce
> > but do we need a pub request to do that?
> I've put the PER in place at
>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/PER-xml-names-20090806/

...I've now replaced one confusion with another.  Going to
(don't ask me why it's such an ugly URI) I'm trying to figure out if
I should send a transition request or a pub request.  It looks
like I should send a transition request.

But it also looks like we need to have a transition meeting with
the director--is that the case?  

So is the next thing I should do is send a transition request?

Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 17:17:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:40 UTC