Re: TEST review copy

(Sorry I intended this to go to the WG)

Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>> Meanwhile, would you prefer reviews of
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2003May/att-0008/L#changes 
>>
>> or
>> http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/
>>
>> ?
>>
>>      -- sandro
>>
> 
> The intended review copy is:
>  http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/editors-draft/draft/
> 
> 
> However, reviewers are referred to a change log that is not in that 
> review copy but at:
>  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2003May/att-0008/L#changes
> 
> This gives a detailed account with (some) rationale of changes since the 
> 31st March publication.
> 
> I note that a few mistakes in the review copy have already been found - 
> I will however leave the review copy unchanged in place until Wednesday.
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> 
>