Agenda for Chicago meeting [Was: Issue tracking for HTML 2.0 document (HyperNews?) ]
"Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 94 12:33:48 EDT
Message-id: <9409211634.AA01987@ulua.hal.com>
Reply-To: connolly@hal.com
Originator: html-wg@oclc.org
Sender: html-wg@oclc.org
Precedence: bulk
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@hal.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <html-wg@oclc.org>
Subject: Agenda for Chicago meeting [Was: Issue tracking for HTML 2.0 document (HyperNews?) ]
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)
In message <9409211620.AA04554@hook.spyglass.com>, Eric W. Sink writes:
>
>Terry Allen wrote:
>>Plain email ought to work just fine and it's at least twice
>>as fast.
>
>I too have to confess that email seems to be working fine here.
>I don't *mind* if someone wants to condense our conversations
>into a more structured format. This process quite naturally
>involves making sure that details don't get overlooked. However,
>I haven't been sufficiently dissatisfied with the status quo to
>motivate a plunge into new methods.
OK. So I'll wait till the next draft comes out.
Will there be a release before the Chicago meeting?
If not, perhaps what I'm interested in is a list of things to check at
the Chicago meeting to make sure they got addressed, and if not, to
discuss how they should be addressed.
Dan