W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > March 2010

Re: Closing issues. Setting and meeting deadlines. (was Re: Issue-9 (video-accessibility): Chairs Solicit Proposals)

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 09:00:10 -0600
Message-ID: <1c8dbcaa1003040700s62059193l85f568dbc4fc2689@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, Matt May <mattmay@adobe.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Hi Paul,

> I think the WG needs to decide how much effort we want to put into
> keeping the Tracker issue State correct when the information is
> already recorded in the Change Proposal Status page.

I agree. When Chris was Chairing, the group did spend time on tracker

It is probably minor updating but, at some point would be good to have
those definitions in sync with the policy.

> Thanks for pointing out this situation.

You are welcome.

Actually the main points that I wanted confirmation of, are  the
second two bullets.

* If the change proposal is not done by the deadline, the issue will
be closed without prejudice and DEFERRED to the NEXT VERSION of HTML.

* An issue that is closed without prejudice in this way can only be
re-raised with approval of the HTML Chairs. It is an ENDPOINT for the
escalation process.

Are these correct?


Best Regards.

Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 15:00:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:09 UTC