- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:06:33 -0500
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 12:02 -0500, Laura Carlson wrote: > > Elsewhere on the survey page we see: > > > > 'A "no" vote in this survey is a formal objection.' > > -- http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/htmlbg/ > > > > So each of the 'no' votes is a formal objection. > > Thanks. What seems to be confusing is that in the W3C Process Document it says: > > "In the W3C process, an individual may register a Formal Objection to > a decision. A Formal Objection to a group decision is one that the > reviewer requests that the Director consider as part of evaluating the > related decision (e.g., in response to a request to advance a > technical report). Note: In this document, the term "Formal Objection" > is used to emphasize this process implication: Formal Objections > receive Director consideration. The word "objection" used alone has > ordinary English connotations." [1] > > For clarification, does the above statement apply to the 4 'no' votes? > Did the Director give the 4 'no' votes due consideration or is the > passage above superceded by the WG charter statement that you cited > [2] so that the power of consideration is relegated to the HTML5 WG > Chairs? Or maybe the 'no' voters would have had to register (in some > other manner) a formal request to have Director consideration? The Director considers formal objections later, when we ask to advance to Candidate Rec or Proposed Rec. And yes, this applies; those 4 objections will be noted in any request we make to advance to CR/PR (unless they are withdrawn between now and then). > > Thanks again. > > Best Regards, > Laura > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies#FormalObjection > [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html#decisions > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 26 June 2007 17:06:38 UTC