Re: LC-39 (CP8.4): must clarify resolution

I was the lucky person who is supposed to redraft 8.4 from DM and do 
something with the entire DM proposal.  I haven't done anything with it yet.

lynne

At 02:02 PM 5/30/2003, Lofton Henderson wrote:

>Lynne (or anyone) --
>
>I'm updating lc-issues to incorporate some missed SpecGL resolutions and 
>closures.  I have a question about LC-39 [1] (and its related LC-16).  At 
>the 20030505 telecon [2] we resolved a bunch of stuff about CP8.4, 
>consistency amongst discretionary choices.
>
>Basically, I think we agreed to follow most of the gist of the DM proposal 
>[3].
>
>But there were objections about complexity, need to simplify rationale, 
>etc.  I seem to recall that someone was given an AI to do this, but that 
>is not minuted.
>
>Does anyone remember?
>
>-Lofton.
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/lc-issues#x29
>[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2003Apr/0034.html
>[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-qa/2003Apr/0030.html

Received on Saturday, 31 May 2003 14:40:21 UTC