This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: A paranoic XPath 2.0 question
- From: David Carlisle <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:09:59 GMT
- Subject: Re: [xsl] A paranoic XPath 2.0 question
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0112210957000.13700-100000@mail.idoox.com>
- Reply-to: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> If there is some point reised which requires voting, what is the
> procedure?
voting in W3C WG's (if it happens at all) is based on the WG membership
not the editorship of the document. Obviously editors have editorial
contrl over th etext but if there is anything contentious enough to
require a vote it should go to the full WG (or I assume in this case to
the full WGs) (This is from my experience being an editor on MathML, I'm
not on XSL WG)
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list