- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:36:44 -0800
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Cc: public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>
It seems like we should be consistent in our handling of the DOM and XHR documents. For example, the copy of DOM at <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html> lacks a Status of this Document section, but presumably the version published by this working group will have one. If we decide that the SotD section of XHR ought to acknowledge the WHATWG, we likely should do the same for this document. The copy of DOM at <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html> seems to give appropriate credit by linking to the Living Standard and listing sensible Editors. Will the version of the document published by this working group also give credit appropriately? Adam On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 5:49 AM, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com> wrote: > This is Call for Consensus to publish a Working Draft of the DOM spec using > #ED as the basis. > > Please note Lachlan will continue to edit the ED during this CfC period. > > Agreement to this proposal: a) indicates support for publishing a new WD; > and b) does not necessarily indicate support of the contents of the WD. > > If you have any comments or concerns about this proposal, please reply to > this e-mail by December 2 at the latest. > > Positive response to this CfC is preferred and encouraged and silence will > be assumed to mean agreement with the proposal. > > -Thanks, AB > > #ED <http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/domcore/raw-file/tip/Overview.html> > > > >
Received on Sunday, 25 November 2012 16:37:45 UTC