W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2004

Re: [XSCH] XPath eq, practical datatype issues and formal specification

From: Jeff Z. Pan <Jeff.Pan@manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:19:34 -0000
Message-ID: <016501c4db96$b21c1a20$6bc65882@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: <www-archive@w3.org>, "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>

Jeremy,

>    Is that too tight for you? (I realise there are other deadlines as 
> well at the moment).

The plan looks fine, although it could be a bit tight - I will try my best.

Jeff


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Jeff Pan" <pan@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: <www-archive@w3.org>; "Ralph R. Swick" <swick@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: [XSCH] XPath eq, practical datatype issues and formal specification


> Jeff Pan wrote:
> > 
> > BTW, do you have any idea about the deadline? 
> > 
> 
> If we want to let other WGs review it over the Xmas holiday then we need 
> to get a move on, my fault really ...
> 
> For instance, a scenario might be:
> 
>    A first complete editors' draft a week today ...
>    Encourage other TF members to review before next Thursday's telecon 
> (16th)
>     At Thursday telecon open it for WG review and determine how/when we 
> will ask other WGs to review (e.g. once WG reviewers have signed off, or 
> in parallel with WG review). For example, we could ask WG reviewers to 
> be done by 21st, we integratre comments and have a document ready for 
> 23rd for review by X??? WGs over Xmas, then first/second week January we 
>   get a draft ready for publication. Might be simpler to have WG review 
> in parallel with other WG review.
> 
> 
>    Is that too tight for you? (I realise there are other deadlines as 
> well at the moment).
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 6 December 2004 15:05:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:50 GMT