Re: New Charmod 2003-08-22

The difference between the txt below and 
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/TR/templates/sept-wd-sotd.html is 
that they're anticipating a CR as their next phase, whereas LC2 looks
more likely for us. I don't feel the need to nail that one down at this 
stage though...

There are a few phrases might be worth borrowing though.

[[
This
> >  interim publication is used to document the progress made on
> >  addressing the comments received during the second Last Call, as
> >  well as other modifications resulting from continuing collaboration
> >  with other working groups.
]]

Perhaps dropping 'interim' since we don't name our next stage?

Dan

* Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> [2003-09-02 15:31+0100]
> 
> 
> They got very close to CR a month or two ago ...
> 
> I would certainly prefer this sort of wording in our SOTD for the 5th Sept 
> publication.
> 
> I guess that is Eric's call, as advised by the chairs.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> Dave Beckett wrote:
> 
> >Character Model for the World Wide Web 1.0
> >W3C Working Draft 22 August 2003
> >
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-charmod-20030822/
> >
> >First one since April 2002.  Interesting wording:
> >
> >  [[This is a W3C Working Draft published between the second Last
> >  Call on 30 April 2002 and a planned Candidate Recommendation. This
> >  interim publication is used to document the progress made on
> >  addressing the comments received during the second Last Call, as
> >  well as other modifications resulting from continuing collaboration
> >  with other working groups. A list of last call comments with their
> >  status can be found in the disposition of comments (public version,
> >  Members only version).
> >
> >  Work is still ongoing on addressing the comments received during
> >  the second Last Call. We do not encourage comments on this Working
> >  Draft; instead we ask reviewers to wait for being informed about
> >  our disposition of their comments, or for Canditate Recommendation
> >  in case of new comments. ...  ]]
> >
> >maybe we could have something similar?
> >
> >The changes aren't entirely clear since they are in a member only web
> >page that could be updated at any time compared to the above.
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >
> 

Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 10:54:08 UTC