W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2009

[wbs] response to 'Publish HTML 5 update with or without warnings?'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of shelleyp@burningbird.net <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:25:01 +0000
To: shelleyp@burningbird.net,public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-1f95f173237b84d1fc463f255b7f173d@cgi.w3.org>

The following answers have been successfully submitted to 'Publish HTML 5
update with or without warnings?' (HTML Working Group) for Shelley Powers.



---------------------------------
Publish draft without warnings?
----
Do you support publishing this Editor's draft (i.e., without 
the additional warnings, also a.k.a. Ian's draft) as a Working Draft at
this time?



 * ( ) Yes
 * (x) No

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 
I'd be willing to see both drafts published, but it doesn't look like this
option will pass, so will go with the one that has additional information 




---------------------------------
Publish draft with warnings?
----
Do you support publishing this Editor's draft (i.e., with 
additional warnings, also a.k.a. Manu's draft) as a Working Draft at this
time?
In order to provide more useful feedback regarding which warning text
should not be considered controversial and thus, should be removed,
please follow the suggestions outlined in this email.


 * (x) Yes
 * ( ) No

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 
Rather than clutter up the draft, the inline warnings give a good idea of
issues still to be resolved, without having to dig through a database. 




---------------------------------
What to publish?
----
Given that these documents differ only in the presence or absence of
warnings, how would you like the results of the poll to be interpreted?



 * (x) I would prefer to publish all Editor's Drafts that have majority
approval as Working Drafts.
 * ( ) I prefer to publish only the one Editor's Draft receiving the most
votes as a Working Draft.

Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments): 
Two drafts would acknowledge the Editor's work, while providing another
document that shows issues of concern. There is no PR problem with this
approach--it reflects the current state of the group. On the other hand, I
have a difficult time understanding why people who profess support for
making information both visible and semantic, would vote for a choice that
does neither.


These answers were last modified on 11 August 2009 at 22:18:02 U.T.C.
by Shelley Powers

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/wd08/ until 2009-08-17.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2009 22:25:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:43 GMT