Hi Kendy, On 29/06/2022 10:00, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
I was hoping that the extensive rationale I provided when I sent out version 2.2 of the proposal helped in understanding that it would have been very difficult to read a document where I had to remove a lot of text and move back a lot of sentences to bring it back to an acceptable version.Can you please check the 2.3 once again, and merge those bits that are acceptable for you, and I'll see how can I rephrase the rest, so that we can finalize this, please?
In the version where you brought back in the text that in my opinion should not be there in the first place I've written many comments to help out in further understanding what I think is wrong with version 2.3.
If we now take as a base the merged v 2.2 without all the problematic text you reintroduced then we should be much nearer to a finished document.
Ciao Paolo -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
