- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 09:43:01 -0700
- To: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
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." Thanks. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 16 April 2002 13:28:16 UTC