• To: simonstl@s... (Simon St.Laurent)
• Subject: Re: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: AN
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 14:11:57 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1022090687.958.270.camel@l...> from "Simon St.Laurent" at May 22, 2002 02:03:59 PM

Simon St.Laurent scripsit:

> I suspect that Working Groups will shudder at the thought of any of
> their precious features being listed as expendable this way, but it's
> about time for clarity if they aren't willing to throw more things out.

Not so fast, or just you wait, 'Enry 'Iggins.  Expect to see some
*very short*, *modular* specs actually emerging from a WG long thought
to be moribund.  W3C confidentiality prevents me from saying more.

-- 
John Cowan <jcowan@r...>     http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,    http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith.  --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: AN
    • From: "Michael Fitzgerald" <mike@w...>

• References:
  • RE: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: R
• Next by Date: RE: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: AN N: RESTTutorial)
• Previous by thread: RE: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: ANN: RESTTutorial)
• Next by thread: RE: RE: Painful USA Today article (was RE: AN
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread