W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > May 2005

Re: SVG12: getPresentation* naming

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 00:23:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-svg@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0505220016280.17792@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Sat, 21 May 2005, Dean Jackson wrote:
> >
> > Third, the Working Group failed to address my concern that the methods 
> > are too underspecified to name them properly, substantive review 
> > comments like e.g.
> > 
> >   http://www.w3.org/mid/4250f647.197089906@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de
> >   http://www.w3.org/mid/4322a5d6.137820203@smtp.bjoern.hoehrmann.de
> > 
> > have been ignored by the Working Group. 
> 
> Ouch! That's the second time in a few days someone has claimed we 
> "ignore" issues. In this case, we have not yet responded, but that is 
> not because we're ignoring it.

Why is it then? Note that the SVG group published a last call draft 
_after_ those two e-mails were sent, without any indication that there 
were still known open issues. Why would you release a "last call" drafts 
without having dealt with all open issues, if you weren't ignoring them?

Is there somewhere we can see a list of open issues that you have not yet 
responded to but that you are not going to ignore?

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Sunday, 22 May 2005 00:23:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:30 GMT