W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > October to December 2000

Re: LC-188, 195, 196, 205, 206, 207 (editorial comments on XML Schema)

From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 09:36:12 -0600
Message-Id: <>
To: w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, "Martin J. Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
Cc: Misha Wolf <misha.wolf@reuters.com>, W3C XML Schema Comments list <www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org>
At 2000-10-07 02:40, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen (that would be me) wrote:
>Dear Martin (and i18n WG):
>The W3C XML Schema Working Group has spent the last several months
>working through the comments received from the public on the last-call
>draft of the XML Schema specification.  We thank you for the comments
>you made on our specification during our last-call comment period, and
>want to make sure you know that all comments received during the
>last-call comment period have been recorded in our last-call issues
>list (http://www.w3.org/2000/05/12-xmlschema-lcissues).
>Our records show that you raised (among others) the points
>registered in our issues list as
>LC-188 Notes on the primer
>LC-195 Eliminate the term 'obtains'?
>LC-196 Need graphics?
>LC-205 I18n notes on primer, misc
>LC-206 I18n notes on structures
>LC-207 I18n notes on datatypes, misc

My apologies.  Owing to a long-standing confusion on my part,
which has now been rectified, issues LC-188, LC-195, and LC-196
had been mistakenly attributed to the i18n WG in the last-call
issues list.  They ought properly to have been attributed to
Martin Duerst.

I am sorry to have laid more work at the door of the i18n WG
than belonged there; the i18n WG should feel itself under no
particular obligation to examine those three issues (although
you are of course welcome to comment on them or on any others).

-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Friday, 13 October 2000 12:18:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:53 UTC