On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 11:56:16PM +0000, Jim Reid wrote:
On Nov 3, 2008, at 16:22, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
By all means Bill express that as your view when you respond to the NTIA consultation. However please don't open up that can of worms here.
just providing a bit of backing material on some of the unstated assumptions in the RIEP WG response. I have no intention to debate the relative merits over email. (But if I can have a quiet chat over there in the bar w/ you...)
anyway, point 10 woudl be clearer if the reason fo rthe must was made explicit.
Noted. Can we agree to leave the matter there? I'll add some explanatory text for the next version.
i think that will help make the point. (as a native english speaker :) --bill