• To: aarons@d... (Aaron Skonnard)
• Subject: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:30:29 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: jcowan@r... ('John Cowan'), simonstl@s... ('Simon St.Laurent'), xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <001d01c24f83$e2926430$0600a8c0@gandalf> from "Aaron Skonnard" at Aug 29, 2002 11:45:34 AM

Aaron Skonnard scripsit:

> I could dig up many other namespace-related proposals in the archives.
> I'm curious, what does it take for the WG to consider revisions to the
> specification? (I'd sincerely like to know)

You have to convince a WG member to do advocacy for the proposal.

-- 
Knowledge studies others / Wisdom is self-known;      John Cowan
Muscle masters brothers / Self-mastery is bone;       jcowan@r...
Content need never borrow / Ambition wanders blind;   www.ccil.org/~cowan
Vitality cleaves to the marrow / Leaving death behind.    --Tao 33 (Bynner)

• References:
  • RE: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
    • From: "Aaron Skonnard" <aarons@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• Next by Date: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was:
• Previous by thread: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• Next by thread: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was: Re: linking, 80/20]
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread