On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Deason <[email protected]> wrote: > So, I discussed the rxgk document with a few others a while ago... we > had some non-substantive or minor formatting/wording/clarification > comments but I think just one major substantive comment. While I've been > waiting for someone to send me the electronic notes from that discussion > in order to bring up the non-substantive comments, I realized I can > mention the substantive one in the meantime. >
Hi all, As Andrew alluded, Andrew, Mike Meffie, Mark Vitale, and I had a conference call to discuss Simon's draft. I am attaching a text file of notes I took during our call. I do not think any of our comments constitute a blocking issue; they are merely formatting and/or readability issues, which we would like to submit to the group for further discussion and consideration. Given that the last-call was several months ago, I want to apologize for taking so long to provide a substantive review of this document. Best Regards, -Tom
afs3_rxgk_notes
Description: Binary data
