- From: Mary Ellen Zurko <mzurko@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:27:09 -0500
- To: "Joe Steele <steele" <steele@adobe.com>
- Cc: "public-wsc-wg@w3.org" <public-wsc-wg@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 16 December 2009 16:26:44 UTC
Yes, there are still some MAYs. Mez From: Joe Steele <steele@adobe.com> To: Mary Ellen Zurko/Westford/IBM@Lotus, "public-wsc-wg@w3.org" <public-wsc-wg@w3.org> Date: 12/15/2009 05:12 PM Subject: Re: Implementation Report template and summary table Do we need to include the ?optional? conformance notation for the table? I did not see any clauses that were marked as optional in the draft template. Joe On 12/11/09 1:07 PM, "Mary Ellen Zurko" <mzurko@us.ibm.com> wrote: I've taken stabs at both here: http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/ImplementationReports < http://www.w3.org/2006/WSC/wiki/ImplementationReports> I'd like to spend a little time at our meeting next Wed taking a look at them, to see if the format is good and makes sense. Would love to hear any feedback on them before then as well. Mez
Received on Wednesday, 16 December 2009 16:26:44 UTC