- From: <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 11:36:54 -0500
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Well, I put them early because I expected they'd be handled with little or no discussion, but I think it's worth the time to briefly visit each. I have no objection if this first proposal someone makes is to close either or both actions without discussion. I also note your later note about ISSUE-53 then being open with no actions. Noah -------------------------------------- Noah Mendelsohn IBM Corporation One Rogers Street Cambridge, MA 02142 1-617-693-4036 -------------------------------------- Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> 02/02/2010 07:45 PM To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com cc: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org> Subject: Re: Agenda for the TAG Teleconference of 4 Feb 2010 On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 17:27 -0500, noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com wrote: [...] > 4. [12]ISSUE-53: [13]ACTION-231 & [14]ACTION-232 > + [15]ACTION-231: on Larry - Draft replacement for \"how to > use conneg\" stuff in HTTP spec - due 2010-01-12 - Pending > review ([16]Email from Larry indicating that "The text was > revised and now has been incorporated into the HTTPBIS > editor's draft" [17]announcement; [18]diffs]) > + [19]ACTION-232: on Larry - Follow-up to Hausenblas once > there's a draft of HTTPbis which has advice on conneg - due > 2010-01-29 - Pending review ([20]Email from Larry to > Michael Hausenblas & [21]thank you response from Michael > H.) I suggest closing those without discussion... either before the meeting or during review of agenda. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2010 16:37:34 UTC