Re: Regarding publishing SDP-US as a Note vs Rec

I think I would object to incorporating profiles into ttml v.next. They
should be independent specs IMO.

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:27 AM, Monica Martin (MS OPEN TECH) <
momartin@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  Glenn,****
>
> The intent is to push relevant changes from SDP-US into TTML v.next. The
> TTWG charter (http://www.w3.org/2012/07/ttml-charter.html) outlines the
> approach of developing a series of technical notes that feed into v.next.*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> Monica****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Glenn Adams [mailto:glenn@skynav.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 06, 2012 9:18 AM
> *To:* public-tt
> *Subject:* Regarding publishing SDP-US as a Note vs Rec****
>
> ** **
>
> Please take a look at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2012Dec/0034.html,
> particularly the last paragraph. If SDP-US is going to be normatively
> referenced by other documents (within or without the W3C), then it probably
> should be a REC.****
>
> ** **
>