- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 21:25:09 +0100
- To: Anne van Kesteren <fora@annevankesteren.nl>
- Cc: www-svg@w3c.org
On Jan 12, 2006, at 21:13, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I agree with Maciej that moving to CR from the current draft is > probably not the > right thing to do given the many oustanding issues and given the > amount of > issues that have not been properly addressed when moving from LC2 > to LC3. As usual we will do our best to please all and to take into account all feedback to make the best spec we can within the imparted time frame, but we have alas already delayed beyond what several large driving adopters would consider good and we will have to make a difficult choice involving timeliness and adoption. I am certain that I speak for the whole WG when I say that we are extremely grateful for the quality of review that this specification has been increasingly getting (I'm only a little sorry to see that many if not the majority of these issues were already there in SVG 1.0 -- but that's certainly not your fault) and that we will not tolerate that this effort be squandered by not taking it into account. Whether or not the next step is LC or CR, all comments will be addressed. I for one would really like there to be another LC so that we can get further review of the changes, but I can only say that I'd prefer we go straight to CR rather than not see adoption since that would waste both your efforts and ours. -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Thursday, 12 January 2006 20:25:24 UTC