- From: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:48:47 +0100
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
Lofton I have generated and uploaded the Zip file. http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-20090130.zip TM. Henderson wrote: > > Okay, I have fixed those broken links. I have updated the file: > > http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Appendix.html > > > (I did *not* change the ZIP file in that directory.) > > Thanks, > -Lofton. > > At 05:48 PM 1/22/2009 +0100, Thierry Michel wrote: > > >> Lofton, >> >> >> Checking carefully the document, I see 3 broken links here >> >> >> >> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Appendix.html >> >> >> >> See: >> http://validator.w3.org/checklink?url=http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Appendix.html >> >> >> createWebCGMRect() >> <http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-DOM.html#createWebCGMRect%28%29>: >> 129 >> Contents >> <http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/Overview.html#Contents>: >> 628 >> TR15 >> <http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Intro.html#TR15>: >> 362 >> >> >> Could you please fix those ? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Thierry. >> >> Thierry Michel wrote: >>> >>> Lofton, >>> >>> I have updated the overview page [1] >>> >>> - changed date and this version URI >>> - Added previous version >>> - changed zip file URI >>> - Updated "Status of this Document" section for an ordinary Working >>> Draft. >>> >>> Let me know if you are OK with the new wording in the SotD. >>> >>> >>> "This is a Public Working Draft of "WebCGM 2.1". >>> This WebCGM 2.1 specification was initially based on a work by the >>> same name, WebCGM 2.1 an OASIS Committee Specification. This W3C >>> Working Draft version of the WebCGM 2.1 specification incorporates >>> requests for changes from comments sent during the Last Call Review, >>> as agreed with the commenters (see Disposition of Last Call comments >>> for WebCGM 2.1). The WebCGM Working Group, plans to issue a second >>> Last Call from more implementation experiences." >>> >>> >>> It is link checked, HTML validated and passes the Publication rules. >>> >>> Therefore we are ready to publish on friday Jan 30th. >>> I will request publication to the Webmaster today. >>> >>> >>> When I have tyour approval for publication I will generate the Zipfile >>> WebCGM21-20090130.zip >>> >>> [1] >>> http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/Overview.html >>> >>> >>> >>> Thierry. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Henderson wrote: >>>> Thanks for all the help. I assume then that you will take care of >>>> the cover page: date, "This version", ZIP file link, and SoTD. >>>> >>>> Publication date: how about week from Friday? (30 January) >>>> >>>> Frozen: I consider it frozen. Today I updated 3 HTML files, a new >>>> ZIP, and uploaded all to the "..current-editor-21/.." directory [1]. >>>> ** WebCGM21-DOM.html, WebCGM21-Appendix.html, Overview.html (which >>>> you will further update); >>>> ** WebCGM21-20090121.zip >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/ >>>> >>>> So ... over to you now. I will keep hands off till you do your >>>> bits and move it away for publication. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -Lofton. >>>> >>>> At 07:15 PM 1/21/2009 +0100, Thierry Michel wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> > Hi Thierry, >>>>> > >>>>> > In it is not a big problem, then let's go ahead and publish >>>>> relatively >>>>> > soon. >>>>> >>>>> OK. Thanks for your editor's work on the document. >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > Do we need a WG resolution to do that? >>>>> >>>>> No we don't. This is not a Transition, only a new publication of an >>>>> ordinary draft. >>>>> >>>>> > Document needs: >>>>> > 1.) validate (DONE) >>>>> Good >>>>> > 2.) pub rules check (needed) >>>>> >>>>> I will do it >>>>> >>>>> > 3.) SoTD, including unique sentence about this version (needed) >>>>> I will also do it >>>>> >>>>> > 4.) Other? >>>>> >>>>> I will check broken links, CSS, etc. >>>>> >>>>> And I will request Publication. >>>>> >>>>> We should decide a publication date. (give a least 5 days for the >>>>> publication Team). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Let me know when the document is ready and frozen on your side and >>>>> I will >>>>> make the necessary changes. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Thierry >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > Thanks, >>>>> > -Lofton. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > At 11:19 AM 1/21/2009 +0100, Thierry Michel wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> >> > Thierry, >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > I think option #1 is ruled out. The test suite is incomplete >>>>> and >>>>> >> > implementations are very incomplete. I guess we could >>>>> actually have a >>>>> >> > very >>>>> >> > long CR, but we would surely return to LC thereafter (then >>>>> maybe go >>>>> >> > straight to PR). And ... I don't think anyone believes that >>>>> the spec >>>>> >> is >>>>> >> > stable yet. >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > I think #2 sounds best. We would publish a new WD to >>>>> incorporate the >>>>> >> LC >>>>> >> > feedback, then continue with spec development in the WG (and >>>>> have a >>>>> >> 2nd LC >>>>> >> > "in a while"). >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > If we did option #3, then it would be almost 6 months between >>>>> >> publishing >>>>> >> > 1st LC and the next publication (2nd LC). Would that be >>>>> problematic >>>>> >> to >>>>> >> > have no publication for that long? >>>>> >> > >>>>> >> > -Lofton. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >>Well it would not be problematic, but W3C recommends to publish >>>>> every 3 >>>>> >>months (which a lot of WGs don't do). >>>>> >>I am fine with option 2, to publish a new Working Draft and then >>>>> publish >>>>> >> a >>>>> >>second last Call in a few months. >>>>> >> >>>>> >>Sorry for my previous emails, my emailer went wrong and sent >>>>> multiple >>>>> >> message >>>>> >>Sorry for the buzz. >>>>> >> >>>>> >>-- >>>>> >>Thierry Michel >>>>> >>W3C >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Thierry Michel >>>>> W3C >>> >> >> >> >> > >
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2009 12:49:25 UTC