W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > October 2011

final report process

From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:09:11 -0400
Message-ID: <CACHXnao7WhpBhooix34CU1c4o7FUjyNdhEroL-tSVhSafGQugA@mail.gmail.com>
To: AWWSW TF <public-awwsw@w3.org>
One other process request I'd like to make - I was thinking this
before the meeting but forgot to bring it up. Let me know if you think
this is draconian:

If Mallet has a dissenting view "Pigs have springs" this can be
recorded in either of two ways

1. If the statement makes sense to everyone, but some people just
don't think it's true or right, then record this as:

Mallet's opinion is that pigs have springs.  or
Mallet believes that pigs have springs.   or
Mallet's view is that pigs have springs.   or
Mallet's view: Pigs have springs.

2. If the statement doesn't make sense to any signer of the report -
i.e. its meaning (implications, consequences) are not clear, then
record it as:

Mallet says: "Pigs have springs."  or
Mallet: "Pigs have springs."
(or "wrote" or "would say")

That is, something needs to make sense to everyone (at least in the
"agree to disagree" sense) before it can be taken out of double
quotes. A disagreement resulting from something not making sense to
someone else is very different from a disagreement based on judgment
or opinion. We seem to have at least as many of the former as of the
latter. Maybe this convention will help encourage us to explain what
we mean in terms that others can understand - or else drop material
from the report that might better be presented elsewhere.

Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2011 14:09:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:21:09 UTC