- From: Roger Johansson <roger@456bereastreet.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 19:06:16 +0100
- To: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On 29 nov 2007, at 15.15, Philip Taylor (Webmaster) wrote: > I pass over much of Ian's message, and address one point only : > > Ian Hickson wrote: > >> The one decision that the HTML WG _has_ made up to this point was >> to adopt the WHAT WG draft wholesale, so it seems that this >> objection is ill-timed. > > The HTML WG agreed to adopt the WHAT WG /as a starting point for > future discussion/. The omission of these words in Ian's message, > and the ?deliberate? addition of the word "wholesale" could easily > lead the naive reader to believe that this group had agreed to adopt > the WHAT WG draft unconditionally. We have not. Agreed. It may be good to clarify that what we voted on was the following: "Shall we adopt these documents as our basis for review? A "yes" response indicates a willingness to use these documents as the basis for discussion with the editors and the WG going forward. It does notconstitute endorsement of the entire feature set specified in these documents, nor does it indicate that you feel that the documents in their present state should become a W3C Recommendation or even a W3C Working Draft." <http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/htmlbg/results> That's "basis for review" and "basis for discussion", not "adopt the WHAT WG draft wholesale". /Roger
Received on Thursday, 29 November 2007 19:06:53 UTC