- From: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 15:15:10 -0700
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: w3c-dist-auth@w3.org
I find that unacceptable for WG-tracked issues (of course it's fine for the author's own issues or to duplicate the WG-tracked issues until the author believes they've dealt with them). The author can close the issues in their document as soon as they've made changes, but for many issues there needs to be some external item for the issues tracker person to mark state on when the WG agrees the issue is actually closed. Lisa On Sep 13, 2004, at 3:09 PM, Julian Reschke wrote: > Lisa Dusseault wrote: > >> While I appreciate all the issues reported with RFC2518, I am not >> dealing with them until we have issue status tracking more firmly in >> hand somehow. Joe is investigating tools to help with this issue. > > I do appreciate the plan to enhance the issue tracking. May I > recommend to simply adopt what I've been doing in the drafts I am / > was editing (which means embedding the issue inside the xml2rfc draft > text using XML extension elements)? > > Best regards, Julian > > -- > <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
Received on Monday, 13 September 2004 22:15:44 UTC