W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > December 2009

RE: Courtesy notification: call for consensus on HTML normative language reference issues

From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:47:38 -0800
To: "noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com" <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
CC: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <paul.cotton@microsoft.com>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D0B1685@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com>
> - The author-only view of the main document, plus the fact that
> it was actively maintained and reviewed by itself for quality, 
> was sufficient to largely satisfy the requirements for a 
> normative language reference.

If you add "adequately" to "reviewed by itself for quality" 
then I don't think this is currently a "fact", nor do I see
any concrete plans or work schedule to make sure 
"actively maintained" or "adequately reviewed" remain facts.

What is the schedule for development, review, and completion
leading to publication of this document?  If there is no schedule,
how can it serve as satisfying the requirement for anything
at all?

Received on Thursday, 17 December 2009 02:48:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:31 UTC