- From: Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:43:03 +0100
- To: "Jose M. Alonso" <josema@w3.org>
- Cc: "Dr D.C.Misra" <dc_misra@hotmail.com>, <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
Not that I have a strong opinion on this one yet, but please note that the Activity at W3C is called: eGovernment so we also need to be consistent with it, too, or think if we should rename it later in time (e.g. if re-chartering it). I have noticed several big companies changing the name of their eGovernment units and using now "public sector". -- Jose El 06/03/2009, a las 13:39, Jose M. Alonso escribió: > Attaching this one to ISSUE-3 > > El 05/03/2009, a las 20:48, Dr D.C.Misra escribió: > >> ---Original Message----- >> From: Jose M. Alonso [mailto:josema@w3.org] >> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:04 PM >> To: Dr D.C.Misra >> Subject: Re: Group Note FPWD is done >> >> Dear Dr D.C.Misra, >> >> Thanks for your comments. Could you please forward them to the >> <public-egov-ig@w3.org >>> ? This is required for them to be taken into consideration (see >> status section of the document). >> >> Best, >> Jose. >> >> >> >> El 04/03/2009, a las 9:58, Dr D.C.Misra escribió: >> >>> I do not feel comfortable with the spelling of e-government as >>> "eGovernment," much worse at the beginning of a sentence. This is >>> grammatically wrong. (Similarly "eGov" is not in order. Which word >>> does it >>> abbreviate- e-government or e-governance? Secondly, inter-changeable >>> use of >>> e-government and electronic government (and, by extension, digital >>> government) do not make for "smooth" reading. I think it may be >>> useful to >>> stick to only one term, namely, e-government though digital >>> government may >>> be more correct technically. The term electronic government could >>> perhaps be >>> avoided altogether as it makes e-government to be a 50:50 affair >>> between "e" >>> and government. On the contrary, the term e-government gives 1/11 >>> weight to >>> "e" and (overwhelming) weight of 10/11 to government (going by >>> number of >>> letters) which appears more appropriate. I am not aware of any >>> guideline/practice or standard laid down in this regard by W3C in >>> which case >>> its guideline/practice or standard no doubt has to be followed in >>> this paper >>> too. >>> >>> Dr D.C.Misra >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org >>> ] >>> On Behalf Of Jose M. Alonso >>> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 3:39 PM >>> To: eGov IG >>> Subject: Group Note FPWD is done >>> >>> All, >>> >>> It has been a very intense weekend. Some of us, namely Kevin, John >>> and >>> me have been working until the very last minute on developing the >>> final draft. We have worked on the document until yesterday night, >>> then called it done. >>> >>> Final document is a snapshot of the current Editor's Draft [1] and >>> we >>> are requesting publication on March 10; comments will be welcomed >>> until April 26. >>> >>> Thanks John, Oscar, Daniel and Owen for providing content for the >>> document. Very special thanks to Kevin for bearing with me over the >>> last couple days and a great editorial work. >>> >>> I think the document is quite solid but no doubt that with the >>> help of >>> others it could be greatly improved, so do not hesitate to send >>> comments or offering authoring help. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Jose. >>> >>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/IG/Group/docs/note >>> >>> -- >>> Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org> W3C/CTIC >>> eGovernment Lead http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/ >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > >
Received on Friday, 6 March 2009 12:43:43 UTC