- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:45:32 -0500
- To: Valentina Presutti <presutti@cs.unibo.it>
- Cc: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Valentina, are there any editorial remarks that should be added to the Status of this Document section? Or should I only update the third paragraph of that section to say that the Working Group does not plan any further revisions to this document? At 10:58 AM 11/17/2005 +0100, Valentina Presutti wrote: >Dear Guus, > >exactly. The document didn't change since the last publication and we >didn't have new comments after that. >(I wasn't sure about what information were needed) > >So, the TF will wait for the Working Group to decide about the Note >publication. > >Many thanks. > >Best regards, >Valentina > > > >>Valentina, >> >>OK, you provided precisely the information I was looking. For a new >>publication it is good practice to summarize the changes. So, here, >>no comments since last publication, no changes, so a good reason to >>go for a Working Group Note. >> >>Thanks, >>Guus >> >> >>>Thanks. >>>Ciao, >>>Valentina >>>On Nov 16, 2005, at 3:48 PM, Guus Schreiber wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Valentina Presutti wrote: >>>> >>>>>Dear all, >>>>>the RDFTM Task Force would like to propose >>>>>the "2005-03-29" W3C Working Group draft of the >>>>>"A Survey of RDF/Topic Maps Interoperability Proposals" >>>>>for W3C Public Note publication: >>>>>http://www.w3.org/TR/rdftm-survey/
Received on Monday, 12 December 2005 20:45:57 UTC