RE: NS 1.0 3rd Ed draft

I've decided we need a transition request, and I'm sending one out
shortly.

paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xml-core-wg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Grosso, Paul
> Sent: Monday, 2009 August 03 12:16
> To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: NS 1.0 3rd Ed draft
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Henry S. Thompson [mailto:ht@inf.ed.ac.uk]
> > Sent: Monday, 2009 August 03 5:51
> > To: Grosso, Paul
> > Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: NS 1.0 3rd Ed draft
> >
> > Grosso, Paul writes:
> >
> > > I'm not really sure what to do here.
> > >
> > > We had said we would publish a pre-PER draft, so I don't really
want
> > > to submit a PER pub request, but what do I want to submit?
> >
> > Aren't you gettting confused with what we agreed wrt the Stylesheet
PI
> > work?  All the changes to Namespaces are small, and have been
> > published as errata, so there's no problem with going straight to
PER.
> 
> Right, I was confused.  Unfortunately...
> 
> >
> > > We can put a publicly accessible draft in XML/2009/* and announce
> it,
> > > but do we need a pub request to do that?
> >
> > I've put the PER in place at
> >
> >    http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/PER-xml-names-20090806/
> 
> ...I've now replaced one confusion with another.  Going to
>
http://www.w3.org/2005/08/online_xslt/xslt?xmlfile=http://www.w3.org/200
>
5/08/01-transitions.html&xslfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/transitions.x
> sl&docstatus=per-tr
> (don't ask me why it's such an ugly URI) I'm trying to figure out if
> I should send a transition request or a pub request.  It looks
> like I should send a transition request.
> 
> But it also looks like we need to have a transition meeting with
> the director--is that the case?
> 
> So is the next thing I should do is send a transition request?
> 
> paul
> 
>

Received on Monday, 3 August 2009 18:26:35 UTC