attachment-0001
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003>Harry,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>Here
are my comments:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>1.
Section 3.3 PWG Proposed Standard and elsewhere:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>I like
your proposed change of terminology from "PWG Working Draft" to "PWG Working
Material" for the successive versions of a specification that lead up to a Last
Call and a PWG Proposed Standard.. The term "PWG Working Material"
can't be confused with the second stage of a PWG standard: a "PWG
Draft Standard". I assume that any PWG project that also produces other
forms of output in addition to a specification, such as a schema is part of the
PWG Proposed Standard, not a separate Standard, right? Also this means
that any Schema has to have an accompanying specification. No schemas by
themselves.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>1a.
There are a number of places where the old term "Working Draft" still exists,
including Process Summary and Figure in Section 9.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>All
occurrences of "Working Draft" need to be changed to "Working
Material".</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>2.
Section 3.5 PWG Staandard and elsewhere:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>Ira
and I would like to propose putting some adjective in front of Standard for the
final stage, such as "Final". So instead of having:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>PWG
Proposed Standard</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>PWG
Draft Standard</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>PWG
Standard,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>we
have:</SPAN></FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>PWG
Proposed Standard</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>PWG
Draft Standard</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>PWG
Final Standard</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>Then
the term Standard by itself can be used to discuss any of PWG Proposed Standard,
PWG Draft Standard, or PWG Final Standard, rather than being ambiguous as to
whether "Standard" means all three or just the last one.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>3.
Sections 3.3 PWG Proposed Standard, 3.4 PWG Draft Standard, and 3.5 [Final]
Standard</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>The
comparison with the corresonding IETF standards is very similar as
follows:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>3.3:
PWG Working Material is equivalent to an IETF Internet Draft.
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003> A PWG
Proposed Standard is equivalent to an IETF Proposed
Standard.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>3.4: A
PWG Draft Standard is equivalent to an IETF Draft Standard.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>3.5: A
PWG [Final] Standard is equivalent to an IETF
Standard.</SPAN></FONT></DIV></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>These
statements should be made in parallel fashion in sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5,
preferably in separate paragraphs, so that they aren't mixed in with our
descriptions.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=120225205-30012003>Or put
them together into a separate section, like the deleted section
3.6.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=120225205-30012003>Tom</SPAN></FONT></DIV></SPAN></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Harry Lewis
[mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, January 28, 2003
21:09<BR><B>To:</B> pwg@pwg.org<BR><B>Cc:</B> sm@pwg.org<BR><B>Subject:</B>
SM> Updated Process<BR><BR></DIV></FONT><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>In
prep for a discussion during the SM call, tomorrow, I've updated the PWG
process document. </FONT><BR><A
href="ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/process/pwg-process-030128.doc"><FONT
face=sans-serif color=blue
size=2>ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/process/pwg-process-030128.doc</FONT></A>
<BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>This is a one-time notification to both
reflectors. Further on-line discussion of the PWG process with occur ONLY on
pwg@pwg.org </FONT><BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=2>---------------------------------------------- <BR>Harry Lewis <BR>IBM
Printing Systems <BR>----------------------------------------------
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>