- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:13:28 -0500
- To: Shawn Medero <shawn@db79.com>
- Cc: public-html-wg-issue-tracking <public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>
On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 09:32 -0700, Shawn Medero wrote: > On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:06 AM, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 13:48 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote: > > [...] > >> > >> I also suggest we demote many/most of our OPEN issues to RAISED, > >> and discourage discussion of issues that aren't OPEN. > >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/open > > > > I pruned that list to 5 issues. I'm interested in more feedback > > before we discourage discussion of the others. > > Should we open "HTML Versioning and DOCTYPEs": > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/4 > > It is one of those that seems to come up in telecons from time to time. I think the occasional discussion of a RAISED issue in passing is fine. The idea here is to use OPEN to mean: this is a/the main focus of the WG for the coming few weeks. About the versioning issue in particular... I thought about that one a bit... the design seems fairly stable and I was tempted to move it to PENDINGREVIEW, actually. I couldn't remember a specific summary of the editor's consideration of the arguments, though, so I didn't do that. Nearby is "Need to update media type registrations" http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/53 I lean toward fleshing that out before we close 4. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 17:14:03 UTC