On 22/11/06 12:23 PM, "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -1 to any changes that would be incompatible to existing dead > draft, at any time. agree, I too prefer no incompatibilities, and I don't see what I proposed as being incompatible (slap me if I'm wrong). > -1 also to changing the draft at all prior to resurrection. We > can see whether we want any new language in there once we have it > back in the process. agree, although this is just a matter of process. So, +1 to resurrect, -1 to "and submit for consideration as a Proposed Standard." > +0 to including *additional* provisions in the draft before > submitting it for approval, because I do agree it¹s incomplete. agree. e.
