- From: Wilson, Kirk D <Kirk.Wilson@ca.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:16:20 -0400
- To: "Smith, Virginia (HP Software)" <virginia.smith@hp.com>, <public-sml@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <F9576E62032243419E097FED5F0E75F30530D207@USILMS12.ca.com>
The following statement: So both parts, marked Proposal 1 and proposal 2, will be implemented. The second part (proposal 2) has 2 alternatives that the editors will work out. Is how I recall the discussion. Kirk Wilson, Ph.D. Research Staff Member, CA Labs 603 823-7146 (preferred) Cell: 603 991-8873 This e-mail may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please delete this e-mail and notify the sender immediately. ________________________________ From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Smith, Virginia (HP Software) Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 7:09 PM To: public-sml@w3.org Subject: [w3c sml] Bug 5922 resolution - please review I want to make sure we all agree on the resolution of http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=5922. The last comment on the bug is misleading. Comment #1 states that there are 2 proposals but, in fact, it is one proposal that has 2 parts. This is what the minutes state also. So both parts, marked Proposal 1 and proposal 2, will be implemented. The second part (proposal 2) has 2 alternatives that the editors will work out. If anyone disagrees with this, speak up asap! -- ginny
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 23:16:59 UTC