- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 04:47:03 +0200
- To: Dean Jackson <dean@w3.org>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
* Dean Jackson wrote: >the SVG Working Group is not allowed to "ignore" any issues. Could you clarify for each of the following documents * http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-SVG12-20041027/ * http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-SVGMobile12-20040813/ * http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-SVGMobile12-20050413/ * (first) SVG Tiny 1.2 Candidate Recommendation * (first) SVG 1.2 Candidate Recommendation which comments have to be formally addressed at time of publication of the document? Do you agree that under the previous Process document [...] For a Last Call announcement up to and including publication as a Recommendation, the Working Group MUST [...] Formally address all issues raised about the document since the previous step. [...] -- http://www.w3.org/2003/06/Process-20030618/ the answers would be * all since the previous step (First SVG 1.2 Working Draft) * all since the previous step (First Tiny 1.2 Working Draft) * all since the previous step (Previous Tiny 1.2 Last Call) * all since the previous step (Last Tiny 1.2 Last Call) * all since the previous step (Last SVG 1.2 Last Call) and in case your answers differ, could you point me to where the Process document notes this or in case of changes, where the changelog notes the change? -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Sunday, 22 May 2005 02:46:17 UTC