Re: CG Report Requirements: inconsistencies?

On 10 May 2012 05:07, Ian Jacobs wrote:
> On 9 May 2012, at 6:15 AM, Florent Georges wrote:

  Hi Ian,

> Good catch! I have updated the requirements to include the
> appropriate boilerplate for final specs.

  Thanks!

>>  Looks to me like they could be merged (adapting CLA/FSA):
>> [...]

> I don't object if they are merged, but I don't think I would
> recommend it.

  I just found it weird to have two sentences following each other
both saying "this doc is published by XXX CG", but I am certainly not
a legal text / English expert ;-)  Works for me!

  Thanks for your support!  Regards,

-- 
Florent Georges
http://fgeorges.org/
http://h2oconsulting.be/

Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 14:07:15 UTC