Re: How can external organization reference draft W3C specifications

Jeff,

sorry I wasn't clearer; I meant that the subject line wording ("How can external organizations reference draft W3C Specifications?") should be incorporated as an item in the List of Concerns now instead of spending too much time trying to find a more verbose but not necessarily more accurate description of the concern.

On 03/20/2012 11:14 AM, Jeff Jaffe wrote:
> On 3/20/2012 1:41 PM, Eduardo Gutentag wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 03/20/2012 09:31 AM, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 16:18:24 +0100, Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/20/2012 12:05 AM, Steve Zilles wrote:
>>>>> All,
>>>>>    There are already 3 items on the List of Concerns [1], all under Contextual/Social Framework,  that, separately, cover various aspects of this request. These are:
>>>>>       * What are the various audiences for documents?
>>>>>       * Desire for stable reference.
>>>>>       * Official drafts are disconnected from some audience needs.
>>>>> It does not seem necessary to add anything to the list, but the request should be considered with these items.
>>>>
>>>> I agree that the three bullets referenced could (in principle) include the issue of how organizations that we liaison with normatively reference our standards.  But I don't see verbiage in the detailed description that would make me confident that the Open IPTV forum concern got addressed.  Would anyone object to making the detailed verbiage more specific to this requirement?
>>>
>>> I think that would be great
>>
>> +1
>>
>>> and look forward to your wording ;)
>>
>> Isn't that verbiage included in the subject line of this thread?
>
> Yes, but the subject line of the thread is not part of the List of Concerns.
>
>>
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>