- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:51:39 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>, Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, 2:23:37 PM, Dan wrote: DC> On Tue, 2003-03-18 at 04:10, Henry S. Thompson wrote: >> [...] >> I urge the TAG to quickly agree a >> form of words suitable for these three specs to include, and the >> Director to allow them to go forward using those words. DC> What's the urgency? Sigh. DC> Either the TAG provides input in time to be useful for these DC> specs, or it doesn't, right? i.e. the TAG isn't critical path for DC> these specs somehow, is it? Yes, Dan, it is; especially when they have made changes to their specs based on their best effort guess as to which way we and the director would jump. >> If we get it wrong, it won't be a catastrophe, and we'll fix it later >> that's what we agreed back in San Jose, and I still believe it's the >> right strategy. >> >> ht Yes. Which does not rule out making the specs as close as possible to where we think they will ultimately end up. -- Chris mailto:chris@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2003 13:51:47 UTC