W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa-wg@w3.org > April 2003

Re: MathML review

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 09:34:43 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030415092313.03ab33d0@terminal.rockynet.com>
To: andrew@opengroup.org
Cc: www-qa-wg@w3.org

Andrew,

At 06:28 PM 4/14/03 +0100, you wrote:
>  So how about Friday 2 May?
>  This suits me - does that give enough time to respond?

Friday 2 May would be fine.  We will put it on the agenda for Monday 5 May, 
with the purpose to see if anyone has any problems with sending it as a 
QAWG contribution.

Please email it to qa-chairs@w3.org on Friday, not to QAWG.  Someone will 
put it in ../QA/Group/.. (member-only) and send the URL to QAWG.

Reason.  We have been operating under the rules that these reviews are 
member-only.  We have not yet addressed changing those rules.  [On the one 
hand, we seem to be moving into operational mode for pro-active reviews of 
Last Call documents.  On the other hand, SpecGL is still an in-development 
Working Draft, which was one of our motives for member-only].

-Lofton.

>On 2003.04.14 18:19 Lofton Henderson wrote:
>>Here is the Last Call message (member only):
>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2003AprJun/0013.html
>>Closing date is 9 May.
>>So what should be the AI date?  Should we make these things due on the 
>>date of the QAWG telecon preceding the LC-close date?  Or maybe the day 
>>before that telecon?  That would give opportunity for Q&A about the 
>>target, or the review, or whatever.
>>-Lofton.
>
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 12:09:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:13:13 GMT