- From: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 06:25:24 +0200
- To: Peter Moulder <peter.moulder@monash.edu>, www-style@w3.org
Le 01/04/11 02:27, Peter Moulder a écrit : > Yes; sorry, the emphasis was supposed to be "Although that sounds bad > when you first read it, the important thing is to consider how each of > those listed concerns will be in two months' time". I deliberately > didn't give my own assessment, because it's uninformed, but I'd have > thought that most of the concerns should be greatly reduced by that > time, that two months is enough time to fix or work around most damage. According to a few ex-colleagues of mine working in nuclear security, probably not. The time needed to secure the whole plant is, according to them, a matter of years, not months. Anyway, this is www-style here and the discussion about the WG's ftf is probably not best hosted here. </Daniel>
Received on Friday, 1 April 2011 04:25:57 UTC