Re: ACTION-250: propose breaking out 2.4 into its own proposal.recommendation from Stephen Farrell on 2007-06-06 (public-wsc-wg@w3.org from June 2007)

From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:17:31 +0100
To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, W3 Work Group <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <4666DE1B.6050200@cs.tcd.ie>

Thomas Roessler wrote:
> In rewriting 2, I'll probably add a note that says that conformance
> claims for products need to elaborate on what "sufficiently
> trustworthy" is, and encourages referring to relevant
> specifications.   That should certainly do for the first public
> working draft.

So I should not create a new issue on the basis that you'll include
it in whichever issue is causing you to re-draft section 2?

S.

Received on Wednesday, 6 June 2007 16:15:51 UTC