- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:09:57 -0700
- To: Forms WG (new) <public-forms@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF33374D1E.E92F011E-ON88257385.007386D9-88257385.0074627D@ca.ibm.com>
OK, so I've gone through the last call DB and done three things: 1) corrected numerous misclassifications or non-classifications of the type of edits done to the spec in response each LC comment. Especially, removed the 'substantive' classification where appropriate, and otherwise provided notes explaining that 'substantive' means only that we added/changed/deleted an element, attribute, function or behavior, but that we did not expect an objection based on the fact that the change did not invalidate any prior implementation experience or what have you. There were a good 25 or so instances of this. 3) ensured that each comment either had at least one reply or (in 4 or 5 cases) that the notes say the person was present for the discussion and agreed with the outcome There were 7 instances of this. We should therefore be able to get a reasonably good LC comment report. I say reasonably good because the system seems to have had problems classifying some of the follow-up mail, so in some cases the thread of follow-up discussion actually appears in our trash bin. Cheers, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. STSM: Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2007 21:11:31 UTC