On 6/6/12 1:55 PM, ext Tobie Langel wrote:
Hi,
I recently stumbled upon a number of use case and requirements docs (such
as MediaStream Capture Scenarios[1] or HTML Speech XG[2]) that were
published as officially looking W3C documents (for whatever that means, at
least, it's not a page on a
* Tobie Langel wrote:
Hi,
(Starting a new thread by replying to a mail and then changing the
subject and quoted text is not a good idea; just start a new mail.)
I recently stumbled upon a number of use case and requirements docs (such
as MediaStream Capture Scenarios[1] or HTML Speech XG[2])
On Jun 6, 2012, at 8:46 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
(Starting a new thread by replying to a mail and then changing the
subject and quoted text is not a good idea; just start a new mail.)
Guilty as charged. Sorry, won't happen again.
I recently stumbled upon a number of use
* Tobie Langel wrote:
On Jun 6, 2012, at 8:46 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
Only documents under http://www.w3.org/TR/ are official publications
as far as Working Group's Technical Reports go.
Can't WG release notes?
Working Groups can publish Working Group Notes as Technical
On Jun 6, 2012, at 10:04 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
* Tobie Langel wrote:
On Jun 6, 2012, at 8:46 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
Only documents under http://www.w3.org/TR/ are official publications
as far as Working Group's Technical Reports go.
Can't WG
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Tobie Langel to...@fb.com wrote:
OK, but the process is lighter, no?
Yes, there is no process besides the WG agrees to publish it.
~TJ
