- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:38:58 -0600
- To: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
It's great to see that WG participants are responsive to comments on the spec... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Jan/0011.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Jan/0008.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2008Jan/0005.html but please be more clear about whether you are answering on behalf of the WG. The only way to answer on behalf of the WG, by the way, is to quote (and cite) WG decisions (of which we have made only a handful). If you are doing anything other than citing a WG decision please note explicitly that you are *not* answering on behalf of the WG, since commenters are likely to infer that you are. Something like The Working Group is still reviewing that part of the design, but meanwhile I'll give you my take on it... Even a quote from the latest WD needs a disclaimer, since the WG agreed only to publish it for review, not that the design in the document is done. And a quote from an editor's draft likewise needs a disclaimer. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2008 17:39:06 UTC