- From: <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:26:05 EST
- To: aaron.m.cohen@intel.com, www-smil@w3.org
- Message-ID: <c3.ed966a5.27e7a93d@aol.com>
Aaron, Thanks for the reply. Can you clarify whether the SMIL 2.0 spec has gone backwards or not? The issuing of a "non-last call" WD seems a departure from the February 2001 process document: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010208/tr.html#Recs at least as I read it. Your reply seems to indicate that rather than moving backwards the SMIL 2.0 spec is close to progress to CR. Am I understanding you correctly? Andrew Watt In a message dated 19/03/01 18:01:08 GMT Standard Time, aaron.m.cohen@intel.com writes: > The March 2001 draft is not a last call draft. It is simply an update > included changes from our last call period which ended several months ago. > We expect to advance the specification to the next phase soon. > -Aaron > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@aol.com] >> Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 1:03 PM >> To: www-smil@w3.org >> Subject: SMIL 2.0 - Duration of Last Call Period? >> >> >> I was wondering if anyone knows the intended duration of the last call >> period >> for the 1st March 2001 WD of SMIL 2.0. I was unable to locate a statement >> as >> to the duration of the last call period in the part of the WD where I >> would >> typically expect to find it. >> >> I also noticed that mention is made of the XHTML + SMIL profile. Does >> progress of SMIL 2.0 to CR, depend on further progress on XHTML+SMIL? >> >> Andrew Watt >
Received on Monday, 19 March 2001 13:26:56 UTC