Re: 1.1?

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/ Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com> was heard to say:
| At 14:25 2003 10 02 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
|>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|>Hash: SHA1
|>
|>I called the spec today V1.1 because there's no obvious provision for
|>another draft without bumping the number. But there aren't any
|>backwards incompatible changes, it's really just editorial
|>clarification, I think.
|>
|>Suggestions welcome.
|
| If there are no real changes, then it's not 1.1.
| Maybe it's a Second Edition.  

That's why I asked :-)

| If there are no obvious provisions for this, then
| the process is broken.

Perhaps.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | My dog is worried about the economy
http://nwalsh.com/            | because Alpo is up to 99 cents a can.
                              | That's almost $7.00 in dog money.--Joe
                              | Weinstein
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD4DBQE/fHOOOyltUcwYWjsRAh59AKCbBJ+AndNsmJs9m0xhxaWb+sT2owCWORMU
Vl0ATipgdRj/YZDiFiKCNQ==
=5Sab
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----