Dear Felix,
I was travelling this and the previous weeks extensively with occasional
WiFi access from public locations, and I cast Logrus vote in a hurry
choosing the option which is not quite correct.
I would like to fix it, if at all possible.
Specifically, in question 6, I should have been choosing "suggests changes,
but supports publication as a W3C Recommendation whether or not the changes
are adopted (your details below)."
In explanation I wanted actually to note that: "We need to publish, but make
changes, since an inconsistency was found between the schema and the
specification about the values allowed for the lineBreakType attribute. In
Logrus opinion, the fix in the schema is only an editorial change. The list
of allowed values for that attribute has been discussed and set a while
back. The change does not affect implementations. In addition, we suggest to
make the schema non-normative to avoid issues like the above in the future.
This also will not influence implementations since the schema is not
referenced normatively from the section of conformance."
Would it still be possible to change Logrus vote on this – it’s minor
change, I guess.
Regards,
Serge Gladkoff
Logrus LLC
From: Felix Sasaki [mailto:fsasaki@w3.org]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 7:32 AM
To: Des Oates; Ankit Srivastava; John Judge; Nicoletta Calzolari;
oreste.signore@isti.cnr.it; Clemens Weins; Yves Savourel; Georg Rehm;
tadej.stajner@ijs.si; "Pedro L. Díez Orzas"; Serge Gladkoff; Daniel
Grasmick; Jan Nelson; Milan Karasek; Lieske, Christian; dave lewis; Jirka
Kosek; Dr. David Filip; Phil Ritchie; Lieske, Christian
Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
Subject: Moving ITS 2.0 forward - your action needed by 21 October latest
Dear ITS 2.0 supporters,
I had mentioned that we can move ITS 2.0 to PR, and your help would be very
helpful.
For organizations that do not implement ITS 2.0 but having your AC rep
filling in this form
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/ITS20PR2013/
by 21 October would be great. NOTE: this is a hard deadline, but filling in
the form will take only 5 minutes.
For the implementers (for the others this is optional): it is important that
you state the following in the form:
- in question 6, choose "suggests changes, but supports publication as a W3C
Recommendation whether or not the changes are adopted (your details below)."
- as an explanation say something like:
"An inconsistency was found between the schema and the specification about
the values allowed for the lineBreakType attribute.
In our opinion, the fix in the schema is only an editorial change.
The list of allowed values for that attribute has been discussed and set a
while back. The change does not affect implementations. In addition, we
suggest to make the schema non-normative to avoid issues like the above in
the future. This also will not influence implementations since the schema is
not referenced normatively from the conformance section"
Above is taken from an existing AC review and adapted - if needed please
re-do the review by filling in the form again.
Doing the above is quite important to express that our group is definitely
OK with the change.
Thanks again for all the support,
Felix