Re: FW: draft findings on Unsafe Methods (whenToUseGet-7)

On Tuesday, April 16, 2002, at 02:11  AM, Paul Prescod wrote:
> Obviously this is fishy because of the interoperability implications,
> but it is also fishy from a procedural point of view that a
> specification designed to be a fish evolved into a mammal during its
> standardization process. What does that say about the initial
> requirements gathering? And if it is primarily intended to walk on land
> now, should the thing still have gills?

Please go back and look at the XMLP charter. If you have evidence that 
there are requirements there which aren't met, you should bring that to 
the attention of the XMLPWG on their comments list.

I wouldn't think that the TAG is the appropriate place to discuss 
whether different W3C activities are "fishy."


Mark Nottingham

Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 13:28:16 UTC