W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Some editorial tweaks

From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 10:30:23 -0800
Message-ID: <92456F6B84D1324C943905BEEAE0278E02D30A6E@RED-MSG-10.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "W3C Public Archive" <www-archive@w3.org>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "Marc Hadley" <marc.hadley@sun.com>, "Nilo Mitra" <EUSNILM@am1.ericsson.se>, "Noah Mendelson" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>

We should definitely put them in the change log.

I take it you meant to say 'ask the WG for license to fix' rather than
'ask the WG to fix'


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen 
> Sent: 04 December 2002 10:25
> To: Martin Gudgin; W3C Public Archive; Jean-Jacques Moreau; 
> Marc Hadley; Nilo Mitra; Noah Mendelson
> Subject: RE: Some editorial tweaks
> These seem find to me. What I would suggest is that we as 
> part of the plan for the next week ask the WG to fix 
> editorial inconsistencies given the changes that has been 
> made to the spec during last call as long as we document them 
> in a change log.
> Does this make sense?
> Henrik Frystyk Nielsen
> mailto:henrikn@microsoft.com
> >I read through Part 1 last night and noted that there are
> >several things that need editorial attention/clarification. 
> >Here is a list of the things I noted, in the order they appear 
> >in the spec. BTW - I'm happy to make all these changes 
> >sometime before close of business Monday.
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 13:30:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:42:17 UTC