W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2006

Re: Agenda of TAG face-to-face meeting, 4-5 October 2006

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 22:38:16 -0700
Message-Id: <d42077aadbf4d1fc163313da2f3b754d@w3.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org
To: Vincent.Quint@inrialpes.fr

On Oct 2, 2006, at 5:24 AM, Vincent Quint wrote:
[...]
>   3.5. Issue XMLVersioning-41[36]
>
>     Pending actions:

There are a couple more, I think; did we lose track of them?

ACTION: Vincent to Write to www-tag about CSS versioning being a 
problem "levels"
  -- http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2006/03/03-tagmem-minutes.html

and TV was going to write about namespaces, DTDs, and mime types. Hmm...
I don't see that recorded as an action, but I was hoping it would get 
incorporated
into the versioning finding, or at least discussed along with it.

Maybe that's setting the bar too high. Hmm.

>        *  DO, accepted on 22 Sep 2005[44]: with NM continue and 
> extrapolate
>           the versioning work DO et al have been doing already, 
> updating the
>           terminology section. Reconfirmed 5 Dec 2005[45], 14 Feb 
> 2006[46],
>           12 Jun 2006[47].
>        *  HT, accepted on 22 Sep 2005[48]: make sure that what he is 
> doing
>           with ontology of XML infoset fits with what DanC is doing on
>           ontology of Language etc. Reconfirmed on 12 Jun 2006[49].
>        *  VQ, accepted on 3 Mar 2006[50]: Write to www-tag about CSS
>           versioning being a problem "levels". Reconfirmed 12 Jun 
> 2006[51].
>        *  DC, accepted on 3 Mar 2006[52]: Look at the document and see 
> if it
>           is good for informing on this SMIL problem of multiple 
> namespaces.
>           Reconfirmed 12 Jun 2006[53].

I tried to recover the context, but I can't figure out what "this SMIL 
problem"
is. I wonder if it's better to withdraw it or if I should ask www-tag 
to remind me/us.

>        *  DC, accepted on 8 Aug 2006[54]: Review definitions of partial
>           understanding, backward compatible, and forward compatible.
>           Progress report[55].

More on that separately. I see the definitions have been elaborated 
significantly
since I took that action.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 4 October 2006 05:38:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:42 GMT