W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Formal Objection Tracker is missing a FO

From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 07:54:47 -0500
Message-ID: <4CA9CE97.1090202@burningbird.net>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: public-html-comments@w3.org
  What I can do is make a Last Call comment about the references to 
WhatWG documents in the HTML5 spec. If no resolution comes about based 
on that Last Call comment, and the decision is made to proceed with the 
WhatWG references, then I can re-issue the Formal Objection. This 
approach would ensure that the FO fits within the W3C procedures.

Thanks.

Shelley

On 10/4/10 5:47 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 09/30/2010 09:04 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>> The existing Formal Objection Tracker[1] is missing a Formal Objection.
>> I submitted a formal objection in June[2], with follow up emails[3][4].
>>
>> Please record these in the Formal Objection Tracker.
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Shelley
>>
>> [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/formal-objection-status.html
>> [2]
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-comments/2010Jun/0005.html 
>>
>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Jun/0277.html
>> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Jun/0047.html
>
> I am having trouble finding a way to treat this as a formal objection. 
> Per the W3C Process[1] "In the W3C process, an individual may register 
> a Formal Objection to a decision".  This is a problem as I have yet to 
> find any record that indicates that the Working Group has decided to 
> include references to the WHATWG in the specification of HTML5.
>
> The path I would recommend is to open a bug report.  If the resolution 
> of that bug report does not resolve your concern, the bug can be 
> marked with a TrackerRequest, and that will[6] result in a decision 
> (even if only a declaration of Amicable Consensus) which CAN be 
> appealed. Furthermore, once an issue is raised, a link to the issue 
> itself in the relevant section(s) can be requested.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> [5] 
> http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies#WGArchiveMinorityViews
> [6] http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#basic
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Monday, 4 October 2010 12:55:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:05 GMT