- From: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 09:04:53 -0600
- To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
I took another look at the latest http://www.w3.org/XML/2013/xml-core-charter.html The lead in sentence under Scope talks about "consider[ing] comments on ... existing specifications", so I don't feel that MicroXML belongs in that list. Also, under Deliverables, MicroXML is listed with no qualifications. My understanding (of at least Henry's comments) was that we would allow but not require us to work on MicroXML, and John's suggested wording at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0019 also reflects this. I suggest the MicroXML bullet be removed from the list under Scope and that John's suggested wording be added as a separate paragraph under the bulleted list. Then remove the MicroXML bullet from the list under Deliverables and add below that list a paragraph saying something like: The Working Group also plans to consider taking a MicroXML specification to Recommendation. I don't know if we should modify or qualify the mention of MicroXML under the Timeline View Summary section or the mention under section 7. What do others (especially John and Henry) think? paul On 2012-11-27 21:12, Liam R E Quin wrote: > On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 08:33 -0600, Paul Grosso wrote: > > [helpful and detailed review] > > I've incorporated all of your comments - thank you! > > I made a guess at microXLM to be in last call in Spring of next year, > based on having a reasonable start already, although James' error > recovery impelemntation may lead to changes. > > Liam >
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 15:05:24 UTC