Processing Re: partial review of Ch.9 -- Defaults

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

in my review, I made some recommendations, and I left some open questions 
without recommendation.

If you want to comment or disagree on an issue, or voice an opinion on an 
open issue/question, I'd like to make a suggestion to help us keep 
order:  pick out the issue from the full review and circulate it under 
separate "Subject", e.g., "ISSUE 9d11:  Generality of lineEdgeTypeDef".

Thanks,
-Lofton.

p.s. Including a link to the original full-review might also be useful:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200805/msg00005.html


At 12:41 PM 5/4/2008 -0600, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>All --
>
>(See also my follow-up message about processing this stuff.)
>
>SCOPE OF THESE COMMENTS.
>==========
>
>I started with the assumption that the TC will retain the requirement for 
>XML-coded defaults stuff.  These comments are only about the defaults 
>stuff in Ch.9.  I have *not* tackled these issues yet:
[...snip...]