W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > January 2013

Re: CFC: Request transition of HTML Microdata to Candidate Recommendation

From: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
Date: 26 Jan 2013 19:51:01 +0100
Message-ID: <51042595.30300@ping.de>
To: public-html-admin@w3.org
Unfortunately I did not notice the preference poll in time. My vote
would not have changed the result. But for the record: I would have
voted "no".

Cheers,
Andreas
---

Paul Cotton:
> The CfC to transition Microdata to CR failed in November 2012.   The only objections to this CfC were about whether the Microdata specification should be on the Recommendation track.  
> 
> These objections were documented in Bug 20082 [1].  These objections have now been resolved by the WG Decision based on a preference poll that indicated the HTML WG wanted the Microdata specification to remain on the Recommendation track [2].
> 
> With the only objections dealt with and with ample support, this resolution now passes.
> 
> /paulc
> HTML WG co-chair
> 
> [1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20082 
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Jan/0182.html 
> 
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sam Ruby [mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 5:16 PM
> To: HTML WG
> Subject: CfC: Request transition of HTML Microdata to Candidate Recommendation
> 
> In accordance with both the W3C process's requirement to record the group's decision to request advancement[1], and with the steps identified in the "Plan 2014" CfC[2], this is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to request transition to CR for the following document:
> 
> http://htmlwg.org/cr/microdata/Overview.html
> 
> Silence will be taken to mean there is no objection, but positive responses are encouraged. If there are no objections by Monday, November 26th, this resolution will carry.
> 
> Considerations to note:
> 
> - A request to advance indicates that the Working Group believes the specification is stable and appropriate for implementation.
> 
> - The specification MAY still change based on implementation experience.
> 
> - Sam Ruby, on behalf of the W3C co-chairs
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#transition-reqs
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Oct/0026.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 27 January 2013 05:20:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 27 January 2013 05:20:18 GMT