W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > November 2001

RE: Proposed Framework Text for F2F (was RE: TBTF: In-context Framework Intro.)

From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 14:21:34 -0800
Message-ID: <79107D208BA38C45A4E45F62673A434D05801E75@red-msg-07.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, <Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com>
Cc: <Chris.Ferris@sun.com>, <fallside@us.ibm.com>, <gdaniels@macromedia.com>, <highland.m.mountain@intel.com>, <hugo@w3.org>, <jones@research.att.com>, <marc.hadley@sun.com>, <ohurley@iona.com>, <ylafon@w3.org>, <www-archive@w3.org>

Not to be picky nor to put additional burden on Stuart but I am slightly
uncomfortable with the ednote as it stands. I realize that the purpose
is to give some flexibility in how we want to move forward. However, it
seems to be such a central part of the model that I am wondering whether
it would be good to qualify the differences a bit more explicitly so
that people don't get the impression that we are completely opening up
the floor to suggestions - this was at least not my impression from
today's meeting.

Could we for example promote Noah's suggestion by providing an
alternative piece of text?

Henrik Frystyk Nielsen

>Sorry to be dumping this all in your in-trays... hopefully a 
>third and final version. The merging of the two paragraphs 
>that Henrik noticed required a slight tweak to Noah's ednote 
>to refer to a single paragraph above rather than two.
>Changes are: merged paragraphs and tweak to the ednote.
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2001 17:22:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:31:39 UTC