On 25 May 2009, at 7:56 AM, Jean-Guilhem Rouel wrote: > Le 21/05/2009 20:17, Norman Walsh a écrit : >> [...] >> it does not start a new CR period or >> otherwise include any transitions. >> [...] >> The document passes pubrules despite the fact that the online checker >> seems unable to find the date necessary to pass test 5.1. > > Hi Norm, > > I think the checker can't find the date because it's in the past. > The sentence "Based on known implementations, the Working Group does > not plan to request to advance to Proposed Recommendation prior to > 01 February 2009." sounds a bit weird. I wonder if it shouldn't be > rephrased (but have no strong opinion). CC'ing Ian Jacobs in case he > has some input. Maybe the intention was to say 1 Feb 2010? _ Ian > > > Also, due to a webmaster shortage, publications are only made twice > a week (on Tuesdays and Thursdays), which means this document will > be published on Thursday 28. Feel free to adjust the date accordingly. > > Best Regards, > Jean-Gui > -- Ian Jacobs (ij@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/ Tel: +1 718 260 9447Received on Monday, 25 May 2009 13:05:07 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 25 May 2009 13:05:07 GMT