- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 22:13:06 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13305 --- Comment #1 from Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> 2011-07-19 22:13:05 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > A WG decision about an Issue can be made in several ways as per the Decision > Policy. See the Escalation Process at > http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v2.html#escalation > For example, a WG decision can be made after a survey is taken and the results > evaluated by the WG Chairs. See "6. Poll or Vote " of the Escalation Process. > In addition, a WG decision can be made by "amicable resolution" if no one > objects to a Call for Consensus for a single change proposal. See "0. Amicable > Resolution" of the Escation Process. > All of these WG decisions should be FINAL and subject only to reconsideration > if the Issue is re-opened with "new information" as per the W3C Process. Some > Working Group members appear to think that these WG Decision can simply be > reconsidered by saying that they missed the Call for Consensus or were not > paying attention. > The Decision Policy should clearly state that these WG Decisions are final and > will only be reconsidered in the face of "new information" as per the W3C > Process. The Chairs understand that there was some confusion amongst WG members about the "finality" of a WG decision arrived thru the "amicable resolution" route. The Chairs are willing to re-open ISSUE-134 because of this confusion. But the Chairs want to change the DP to ensure that this is the last case where this exception is applied. -- 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 Tuesday, 19 July 2011 22:13:07 UTC