www-tag@w3.org from October 2013 by date

Thursday, 31 October 2013

• Halloween minutes Anne van Kesteren

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

• Re: Call for Nominations to W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Re: Unrestricted publishing in EME? Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Henri Sivonen
• Re: Call for Nominations to W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Konstantinov Sergey
• Re: FW: Call for Nominations to W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Arthur Barstow
• FW: Call for Nominations to W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) Appelquist Daniel (UK)

Tuesday, 29 October 2013

• Re: Perma.cc Announcement Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Perma.cc Announcement Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Re: Unrestricted publishing in EME? Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Tim Berners-Lee

Monday, 28 October 2013

• Re: Unrestricted publishing in EME? Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Henri Sivonen
• Re: Unrestricted publishing in EME? Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Eric J. Bowman

Sunday, 27 October 2013

• Unrestricted publishing in EME? Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Tim Berners-Lee

Friday, 25 October 2013

• Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent? Henry S. Thompson

Thursday, 24 October 2013

• Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent? Philippe Le Hegaret

Wednesday, 23 October 2013

• Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent? L. David Baron
• Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent? Henri Sivonen
• Re: DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent? Anne van Kesteren

Tuesday, 22 October 2013

• DRM, EDE, CDM, W3C and the TAG: Is <object classid="[flash]"...> the relevant precedent? Henry S. Thompson

Friday, 18 October 2013

• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Brian Kardell
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Douglas Crockford
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Tim Bray
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Douglas C rockford
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Anne van Kesteren
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Brian Kardell
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Tim Bray
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Brian Kardell
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Anne van Kesteren
• Re: XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Bjoern Hoehrmann
• XHR vs JSON, was: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Julian Reschke
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Anne van Kesteren
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Tim Bray
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Re: Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Martin J. Dürst

Thursday, 17 October 2013

• Next Steps on JSON + Proposed TAG Resolution Appelquist Daniel (UK)

Thursday, 10 October 2013

• TAG telcon of 2013-10-10 -- Draft minutes Jeni Tennison
• Draft F2F Minutes Available Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Re: Link rot in Supreme Court decisions Herbert van de Sompel

Wednesday, 9 October 2013

• RE: Link rot in Supreme Court decisions Larry Masinter
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Tim Bray
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Bjoern Hoehrmann

Tuesday, 8 October 2013

• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Tim Bray
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Brian Kardell
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Jorge Chamorro
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Tatu Saloranta
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• ISSUE-68 (JSON-FU): Potential Discrepancies between IETF JSON and ECMA JSON Technical Architecture Group Issue Tracker
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Appelquist Daniel (UK)
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Allen Wirfs-Brock
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Brian Kardell
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Jorge Chamorro
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Tim Bray
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Jorge Chamorro Bieling
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON John Cowan
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Carsten Bormann
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Allen Wirfs-Brock
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Peter F. Patel-Schneider
• Re: [Json] FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Tim Bray
• FYI ECMA, W3C, IETF coordination on JSON Larry Masinter

Wednesday, 2 October 2013

• Yet another browser (or yet again a browser) Noah Mendelsohn

Last message date: Thursday, 31 October 2013 17:45:15 UTC