W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > April 2017

Re: Re 2: Proposal for charter changes, in view of the formal objections by Vivliostyle & Disruptive Innovation

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2017 12:43:34 +0200
Cc: Florian Rivoal <florian@vivliostyle.com>, W3C Publishing Business Group <public-publishingbg@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, public-new-work@w3.org
Message-Id: <A73DC314-7B96-4D70-B994-0AE434E0B88E@w3.org>
To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>

I have just made an update to the proposed charter text (still in the separate branch[1]):

- separated the rec-track and non-rec-track documents in the list of input documents
- I have also added a reference to HTML, CSS, and SVG in the list of input documents with some general text on why those documents appear there

Are these o.k. with you?



[1] https://rawgit.com/w3c/dpubwg-charter/vivlio-di-objections/index.html
> On 25 Apr 2017, at 11:10, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:
> Le 24/04/2017 à 21:04, Ivan Herman a écrit :
>> Daniel,
>> I have just realized that I may have misunderstood what you said about rec track input documents. Do you mean to separate those documents that are either recs or are on rec-track by another WG from those that are either notes or drafts for notes? If that is what you mean, then I agree that would be helpful and I am happy doing it (tomorrow...)
> Yes, that was exactly my suggestion.
> </Daniel>

Ivan Herman, W3C
Publishing@W3C Technical Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704

Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2017 10:43:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:39 UTC