Re: Message 67: Response to your issue sent to the XForms WG abo ut the XForms Last Call WD

Thankyou.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Faul" <jfaul@cardiff.com>
To: "Thierry Michel" <tmichel@w3.org>
Cc: <www-forms-editor@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:36 PM
Subject: RE: Message 67: Response to your issue sent to the XForms WG abo ut
the XForms Last Call WD


>
> Thierry,
>
> Thank you for considering my comments and for strengthening the exit
> criteria. The new exit criteria are certainly an improvement over the
> original. I think we could do more, but in the interest of moving forward,
I
> agree with this resolution to my comments.
>
> J Joel Faul Director, Product Development
> jfaul@cardiff.com http://cardiff.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thierry Michel [mailto:tmichel@w3.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 5:48 AM
> To: Joel Faul
> Cc: www-forms-editor@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Message 67: Response to your issue sent to the XForms WG
> abo ut the XForms Last Call WD
>
>
>
>
> Joel Faul,
>
> Your issue sent to the W3C XForms WG about the XForms Last Call Working
> draft
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xforms-20020118/
> Your issue is archived at
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Feb/0099.html
>
>
> -----------------------
> XForms WG Resolution about CR exit criteria: (from the status document of
> the upcoming CR ):
>
> On completion of the review, the XForms Working Group will advance the
> specification to Proposed Recommendation according to the following exit
> criteria:
>
> Sufficient reports of implementation experience have been gathered to
> demonstrate that XForms Processors based on the specification are
> implementable and have compatible behavior.
>
> An implementation report shows that there is at least
>     * one fully conforming XForms full processor
>     * one fully conforming XForms Basic processor
>     * one interoperable implementation of each feature
>
> and formal responses to all comments received by the Working Group.
>
> -----------------------------
> Please respond to state that you agree with this Resolution.
>

Received on Thursday, 3 October 2002 06:36:21 UTC