[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
READ TODAY: Cover letter for mailing to X3J13
- To: Masinter.pa@XEROX.COM
- Subject: READ TODAY: Cover letter for mailing to X3J13
- From: "Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
- Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1987 22:37 EDT
- Cc: cl-cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: Msg of 15 Jun 1987 17:29-EDT from Masinter.pa at Xerox.COM
- Sender: FAHLMAN@C.CS.CMU.EDU
The second sentence in this paragraph isn't a sentence, and I can't
figure out what it's trying to say. Something got garbled.
In most cases, the cleanup committee has explicitly endorsed the
proposal -- i.e., we all think it is a good idea. In some cases, while
the committee has generally agreed that the proposal is a good idea,
there hasn't been sufficient time to obtain agreement about the exact
form of the proposal; in those cases, while an earlier version was
circulated among the cleanup committee. In most of these proposals, some
earlier version was circulated to the committee and explicitly voted on.
In a few cases (identified in the proposal) there has been a great deal
of disagreement, but that we generally thought that we should bring the
matter to the attention of the larger group, for discussion and
I'm not sure I'd mention the "not yet submitted" issues at all in this
list. If the idea is to solicit proposals on these issues from outside
the cleanup committee, that's OK, but in that case we need to describe
the problem better, and I would argue that this should be done in a
separate communication. I don't feel passionately about this, but I do
think it's a bit confusing.
Otherwise, this looks OK to me.