Re: Glossary for group input

Sharron, editors, chairs,

Ok, a new TR means we need a FPWD transition. Not sure we could that  
on time. Besides, I discussed this and hear a good recommendation on  
that /TR should be used for snapshots, makes perfect sense.

If we think this document will evolve significantly and it'll be a  
living one, what if we put it on the wiki for now, reference it from  
the Note and update it later in time? We could always release it as  
FPWD in year 2.

Comments? Suggestions? This needs a decision *asap*.

-- Jose


El 07/05/2009, a las 10:45, Jose M. Alonso escribió:
> Thanks, Sharron. I was thinking of a glossary we could add as a  
> section to the document but I think your idea of having it as a  
> separate document it's better so it could have a live on hiw own, we  
> could update it separately and link it from other documents.
>
> The only downside is that I'm not sure we could get a "/TR" pointer  
> on time and I'm not sure how we should refer to the glossary from  
> the doc, suggestion?
>
> I'm trying to find out about the "/TR" part.
>
> Cheers,
> Jose.
>
>
> El 07/05/2009, a las 5:00, Sharron Rush escribió:
>> Greetings all,
>>
>> I am attaching the glossary even though I must still complete the  
>> last five entries.  But it is late and I am done for tonight.  So  
>> please review the terms, send corrections or omission.  Jose needs  
>> me to finish by end of the day Thursday.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Sharron
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Sharron Rush |  Executive Director  |  www.Knowbility.org |  512  
>> 305-0310
>> Equal access to technology for people with disabilities
>>
>> <eGov-glossary.html>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 7 May 2009 16:47:47 UTC