- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:20:08 +0200
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Cc: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>, www-svg@w3.org
On Saturday, May 21, 2005, 5:31:35 PM, Bjoern wrote: BH> So you are saying that in the case above prose and schema could not be BH> in conflict and yet you agree that prose and schema are in conflict. No BH> sense it makes to me, sorry I am. So still failing to see how the text BH> under discussion is not redundant with D.3.1 (if appropriate at all), I BH> stand by my objection. We have considered your request to remove the third paragraph of D.2 Terminology after "All examples are informative, not normative." on the grounds of redundancy with D.3.1. We find that the indicated text contains important information not conveyed in D.3.1 and that its removal would therefore make the specification less precise. It would also reduce compliance to the QA Specification guidelines. Since the indicated text was added in response to an earlier comment from another commentor, we consider that removal of the indicated text would be unwise. Your earlier objection will stand on record, although we encourage you to follow up in the next two weeks with further clarification if it was not your intent to reduce our QA Spec Guideline compliance. -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 17:20:21 UTC