- From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 17:34:33 +0100
- To: "Cruikshank, David W" <david.w.cruikshank@boeing.com>
- CC: public-webcgm-wg@w3.org
David, See responses in line. Cruikshank, David W wrote: > The STOD already has this paragraph: > > "This specification is based, in large part, on a work by the same name, > WebCGM 2.0 an OASIS Committee Specification submitted to W3C as WebCGM > 2.0 Submission. This Member Submission is related to the previous W3C > work on WebCGM 1.0, and draws on experiences with that format from > implementors and users over five years. This Working Draft incorporates > feedback and discussion following the Submission." > > Actually that looks like is needs to be cleaned up a little too, e.g., > "Working Draft"?? I guess you are not browsing the proper "Status of this Document" version. The WebCGM 2.0 Recommendation cover Page is available at http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/Group/2006/REC-webcgm20-20070115/ As this version does not mention "Working Draft". > > Anyway, to handle the status of WebCGM 1.0, I would propose a paragraph > added like the following: > > "WebCGM 1.0 functionality is mostly a subset of WebCGM 2.0 > functionality, with a few exceptions (e.g., feature deprecation) as > described in this WebCGM 2.0 text. While WebCGM 1.0 remains a valid > specification, primarily to support existing data, use of WebCGM 2.0 > viewers and authoring tools is encouraged." I have added your paragraph to the SOTD http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/Group/2006/REC-webcgm20-20070115/ and have removed the previous wording: "It supersedes the previous W3C Recommendation of 17 December 2001". > > Is there more that needs to be said than that?? No it looks good to me. The only issue left (to my knowledge) is the OASIS URI to be mentioned; Please give me the proper one if this one is not correct. This version: http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/index.php#webcgm2.0 All WG members should review this cover page. Thanks.
Received on Monday, 8 January 2007 16:34:45 UTC