W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > June 2002

RE: proposals without much pushback

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 18:36:43 -0600
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E40350B154@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>, wsawg public <www-ws-arch@w3.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 3:05 PM
> To: wsawg public
> Subject: Re: proposals without much pushback
> 
> 

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0033.html     
 +1
> 

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0021.html     
This seems out of scope, but I can live with it.

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0030.html    
 +1

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0031.html     
no opinion

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jun/0000.html     
I'm surely a small minority, but I'd prefer "W3C or ISO standard 
schema syntax" See the IETF discussion of a similar issue spawned 
by James Clark http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-use/mail-archive/msg00217.html
This is not a "lay down in the road issue" for me, so please don't waste F2F
time if no one else cares about it.

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0446.html  
I can live with it

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0459.html  
no opinion

> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002May/0435.html  
I like the original wording better, but I can live with it
> > 
>
> 
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2002 20:37:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:00 GMT