Re: Response Request For SVG 1.2 Tiny Comments

Doug Schepers wrote:
> We hope you have had time to review our responses to your comments on
> SVG 1.2 Tiny:

Apologies for the late reply, Doug. I have discussed your responses with
representatives of XHTML2 and RDFa (Shane McCarron and Steven
Pemberton). Our responses are below:

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0063.html

These changes have been discussed and are acceptable.

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0066.html

The SVN 1.2 Tiny document as it has been modified as a result of these
comments is acceptable.

> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0068.html

The changes made to the document satisfy our comments.

> We are attempting to make our transition to PR early next week, so we
> would appreciate your timely response indicating whether our resolutions
> satisfy your comments.

Thank you for the wonderful work that the SVG Working Group has done on
SVG 1.2 Tiny. We're quite excited to see RDFa adoption in another
XML-family language. We look forward to the day when SVG 1.2 Tiny
reaches REC.

all the best,

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.

blog: POSIX Threads Kill: Scaling Past 100K Concurrent Web Requests
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/09/30/scaling-webservices-part-1

blog: Fibers are the Future: Scaling Past 100K Concurrent Requests
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/10/21/scaling-webservices-part-2

Received on Monday, 3 November 2008 16:18:23 UTC