W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org > January to March 2004

Re: 2E PER: scope of comments/review on PER?

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:24:23 +0000
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5b4qsf3lpk.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> writes:

> what is the appropriate scope of review and comments on the PER
> I am particularly interested in datatypes, and was thinking of
> reviewing using the errata and the new version to make comments about
> the changes beteween the new PER and the REC of 2001.
>
> Is that appropriate?

Yes -- the appropriate target for review _of the PER_ is the set of
changes since the 1st edition of 2001.

Of course comments about unchanged material are also in order, but
it would simplify the WG's life if they could be held until after
2E is published as a REC (or knocked back).

ht
-- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 05:25:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:50:02 UTC