- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:12:33 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9898 --- Comment #11 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2010-06-14 12:12:31 --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #2) > > I think we need to be more clear about the finality of Working Group Decisions, > > and encourage participant only if at least one of the following holds: > > > > (a) They have new information which was not available at the time of the > > decision. > > That seems like a valid reason to reopen a Decision. > > > (b) They would like to raise a Formal Objection to the decision. > > The Process document says: "When the Chair believes that the Group has duly > considered the legitimate concerns of dissenters as far as is possible and > reasonable, the group SHOULD move on." > http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#managing-dissent > > After a Decision, the Working Group Decision Policy has already provided due > consideration. If someone merely upgrades into an FO a previous expression of > disagreement that the chairs have already considered, I think the FO should > just be recorded and the group should move on. Otherwise, the procedure would > be vulnerable to DoS by FO. The HTML WG decision process does not trump W3C procedures [1]. > > > In particular, the participants who made dozens of posts about a decision > > without providing new information should have been advised to proceed otherwise > > or take discussion elsewhere. > > Indeed. > > > That being said: while there has been a burst of discussion about the last few > > issues to be resolved, there have been at least 36 total issues have been > > resolved since the decision policy has been adopted. For most of these resolved > > issues, there are no ongoing permathreads and the results of the process are > > generally accepted. So I am not sure it is correct to generalize from the last > > three issues resolved to the process in general. > > Fair point. [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies#WGArchiveMinorityViews -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 14 June 2010 12:12:35 UTC