- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 09:59:09 -0500
- To: ricko@allette.com.au
- CC: w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org
Tim, Jon, When I added a "status of this document" section, I neglected to add a "comments should be sent to ..." sentence. The last thing I want to see is insightful and/or useful comments on that spec[1] not getting due consideration. Tim, as editor, would you prefer comments were sent to this forum, or to you directly in stead? Jon, as chair, what do you think about comments on MCF-XML in this forum? (a) absolutely not: do it again and we file a motion to remove you from the WG (b) I'd rather they didn't, but since Tim reads the mail here, it's reaching the editors, and so no serious harm is done. But please send comments directly to the editor as a rule. (c) Only if they directly relate to xml-lang, xml-link or other specs in scope here (d) Sure! we expect mcf-xml to be reviewed in this forum eventually, so we might as well start now. Rick Jelliffe wrote: > > The MCF and XML-data people might be interested in the HyTime > "description tables". (HyTime:1992 6.5.6) [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-MCF-XML-970624 -- Dan Connolly http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 30 June 1997 10:58:16 UTC