RE: review of qa-floating-times.en.html - additional article?

I could also just send a pull request? Or we could talk it through. Let me know what you'd prefer.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ishida@w3.org [mailto:ishida@w3.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 2:05 PM
> To: Phillips, Addison <addison@lab126.com>; public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: Re: review of qa-floating-times.en.html - additional article?
> 
> On 01/06/2016 21:50, Phillips, Addison wrote:
> > In general, I think this is a good thing.
> >
> > I have a long list of particular observations about your summary of terms,
> though. How would you like those?
> 
> if it's that long, it might be easier to talk through it rather than to write it all
> down(?)
> 
> ri
>

Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2016 21:32:16 UTC