Mike Schinkel wrote:
My opinion is this sounds like a great idea! Will you be doing the edit on
the current proposal?
yes, I intend to do before the end of this week.
I am surprised however at the number of people who felt Currency
unit/denomination used identification was important and it
Joe Andrieu wrote:
This may be a fact of test bias. The test asked for four answers, so I
selected four answers, and #4 for me was Currency unit/denomination used.
I didn't really have my heart in it, so to speak.
Sorry for this. You're welcome to change your vote, if you want to. See
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Guillaume Lebleu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
I suggest the current spec focuses on the top 3.
I see no need to be so restrictive.
--
Andy Mabbett
Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/
Free Our Data:
See below the results for What do you think are the [4] most important
features [out of 8] for the currency proposal?
Thank you to all who have participated.
My recommended next step is to edit the current proposal so that it
focuses only on the 3 top features below, with the goal to get a
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Guillaume Lebleu
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 6:07 PM
To: Microformats Discuss
Subject: [uf-discuss] currency quickpoll results and suggested next step
See below the results for What do you think are the [4] most
Mike Schinkel wrote
I am surprised however at the number of people who felt
Currency unit/denomination used identification was
important and it seems like an edge case to me. I'm hoping
that this become an optional aspect as opposed to always
required, and the same with amount, actually.
-discuss] currency quickpoll results and suggested next step
Mike Schinkel wrote
I am surprised however at the number of people who felt Currency
unit/denomination used identification was important and it seems like
an edge case to me. I'm hoping that this become an optional aspect as
opposed
