wait wait wait.... Liam said "If it is optional, isn't one implementation enough?" Umm.... maybe? Can someone check on that? On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 1:51 PM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > Liam, > > we do plan to publish a revised CR... > > Ivan > > ---- > Ivan Herman > +31 641044153 > > (Written on my mobile. Excuses for brevity and frequent misspellings...) > > > > > On 11 Nov 2016, at 20:48, Liam R. E. Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 2016-11-11 at 10:02 -0800, Robert Sanderson wrote: > >> One of our exit criteria is: > >> > >> The bodyValue property of an Annotation. > >> > >> However according to the report ( > >> http://td.spec-ops.io/test-results/annotation-model/all.html), we > >> have only > >> one implementation of bodyValue (EF). It's 1:4 in the annotation > >> optionals > >> section. > >> > >> I don't believe we'll get a second implementation of it, so do we: > >> > >> * Just remove the exit criterion, as it's an optional feature anyway > > > > That sounds like a substantive change, so you could publish a new LCCR. > > > > But, if it's an optional feature, isn't one implementation enough? > > > > > > > > -- Shane McCarron Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
Received on Friday, 11 November 2016 20:42:45 UTC