- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:21:58 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11124 --- Comment #11 from Ms2ger <Ms2ger@gmail.com> 2011-11-20 20:21:56 UTC --- (In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Decision: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jul/0213.html > > > > Change Proposal: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/0120.html > > Something went wrong here. > > This bug rightly should never have been escalated to an issue to begin with. Indeed. > Do we really want to be using to micro-manage editorial choices about which > there are a variety of not-particularly-strong opinions and that therefore > amount purely to judgement calls that properly are best left up to editorial > discretion -- and that have no effect either way on actual implementation > conformance criteria? Yes, this is exactly what the WG Chairs would like to do, AFAICT from their decisions. Unfortunately, you're paid to deal with their stupidity. -- 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 Sunday, 20 November 2011 20:22:03 UTC