[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: 1.1?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 / Paul Grosso <firstname.lastname@example.org> 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 <email@example.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-----