- From: Howard Leicester <howard_leicester@btconnect.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 21:06:07 +0100
- To: 'Karen Lewellen' <klewellen@shellworld.net>, 'ALAN SMITH' <alands289@gmail.com>
- CC: 'David Best' <davebest@cogeco.ca>, 'Phill Jenkins' <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, 'Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL' <ryladog@gmail.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Peace And Love! Howard L XXX -----Original Message----- From: Karen Lewellen [mailto:klewellen@shellworld.net] Sent: 31 August 2016 20:18 To: ALAN SMITH <alands289@gmail.com> Cc: David Best <davebest@cogeco.ca>; 'Phill Jenkins' <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>; 'Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL' <ryladog@gmail.com>; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: RE: Technical baseline clause revisited? So Sorry Alan, The private, referred to David, which is why I shared that under his reply. I still need to read posts from the 25th, that was the day of my mediation, and I am still digging out. Karen On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, ALAN SMITH wrote: > Karen, > > If by private, were you are referring to my reply to Phil? > It was to the entire chain and you were included in the cc line back on 8-25-16. > > And yes, I wish complaining paid better as well. 😊 > > Best. > > Alan > > Sent from Mail for Windows 10 > > From: Karen Lewellen
Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2016 20:06:47 UTC