Re: Next last call publication & question on todays meeting

I disagree with the solution proposed for action-527.
The spec must explicitly list extensibility points IMHO, in order to make
the schema changes.
Rgds
dF

Dr. David Filip
=======================
LRC | CNGL | LT-Web | CSIS
University of Limerick, Ireland
telephone: +353-6120-2781
*cellphone: +353-86-0222-158*
facsimile: +353-6120-2734
mailto: david.filip@ul.ie


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I read in today's raw meeting minutes
> http://www.w3.org/2013/05/15-**mlw-lt-minutes.html<http://www.w3.org/2013/05/15-mlw-lt-minutes.html>
> "skipping topic: Consensus to publish Last Call"
> Why is that? Because of the extension change which is not normative? If
> that's the case I propose to do the following:
>
> - If there is no disagreement on action-527
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-multilingualweb-**
> lt/2013May/0139.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-multilingualweb-lt/2013May/0139.html>
> by Friday EOB
> and no other substantive issue comes up, I will prepare the publication,
> to be done Tuesday 21 May.
>
> Wrt to the HTML reference for "elements within text": changing just the
> pointers to groups of elements in HTML5 (e.g. "phrasing content") and list
> elements explicitly (e.g. "script") won't warrant a last call delay. Of
> course, if the HTML references are resolved by Monday EOB next week (that
> would be needed for publication on Tuesday), that's even better.
>
> If you disagree with this approach and esp. if you see other issues,
> please state that in this thread asap.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Felix
>
>