- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 01:10:15 +0200
- To: Jon Ferraiolo <jon.ferraiolo@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
* Jon Ferraiolo wrote:
>timeframe. While clearly these sections have shortcomings and indeed should
>be improved, and thanks for all of your comments, I think it is worth
>pointing out that: (a) somehow these sections managed to get through
>multiple Last Call, Candidate Recommendation, Proposed Recommendation and
>Recommendation milestones in the past, and (b) have managed to prove
Thanks for pointing this out, Jon. I agree, it is indeed a problem that
Working Drafts that clearly have many shortcomings can enter Last Call.
>sufficiently satisfactory for dozens of commercial implementation of the
>SVG language, including viewers, server products and authoring tools,
>targeting a wide range of platforms from set-top boxes to mobile phones to
>desktop computers. Yes, let's make the spec better, but let's also maintain
>some perspective. The W3C process is to produce specifications which are
>implementable.
The W3C Recommendation Track process is designed to maximize
consensus about the content of a technical report, to ensure
high technical and editorial quality, and to earn endorsement
by W3C and the broader community.
-- http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/
--
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Friday, 20 May 2005 23:09:33 UTC