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

ISSUE-9: video-synchronization - suggest closing on 2009-08-27

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 02:49:14 -0700
Message-id: <0A7B2236-3565-4717-BF08-A27FC1DB910A@apple.com>
To: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/9

At the last telecon(*), there were some objections to closing issue 9.  
I asked for the objections to be stated in email for benefit of the  
rest of the group, so far  I have not seen such a statement. I hoped  
to find explanation in the minutes, but the minutes have not yet been  
sent. Looking at the IRC logs, I found the following mentions:

 > <cyns> Sean: Want to keep open 9, haven't looked at 6

I'm not sure if Sean stated a reason for wanting to keep issue 9 open.  
If so, it is not recorded in the minutes. Does anyone remember a  
reason being given?

 > <cyns> Doug: 10 is about SMIL, Dick Bolterman wants to follow up on 9

This seems like a misunderstanding, unless Doug has some private  
communication from Dick that I have not seen. Dick Bulterman asked to  
keep issue *10* open pending review by the SMIL WG[1]. As far as I  
know, he did not have any comment on issue 9, or involvement in its  
origination. ISSUE-9 issue was raised by Chris Wilson based on  
comparisons to the architecture and design of Windows Media.

 > <cyns> Sean: keep 6, 9 and 10 open until some SMIL people are on  
the call.

I don't believe SMIL people have ever expressed interest in issues 6  
or 9, only 10. In fact, arriving late to IRC, I said:

 > <mjs> SMIL people didn't object to closing 6 or 9
 > <mjs> they only asked to keep 10 open pending their review

In response, Dan Connoly said:

 > <DanC> I agree about 6, mjs, but not so sure about 9... heard some  
sentiment for keeping it open too

So, can anyone articulate these sentiments? Is it based on people on  
the telecon expecting SMIL WG to be interested, even though they have  
never commented on this issue since the time it was raised? Were any  
of the people expressing this sentiment members of SMIL WG?


As you can see, it's incredibly hard to infer the reasoning from the  
minutes alone. If we had a recording or full transcript, maybe I could  
better determine what was said. Failing that, I'd like to ask someone  
to give the reasoning by email, Otherwise, I propose to close this  
issue next Thursday (since there has already been more than a week's  
worth of discussion time.

Regards,
Maciej


* - Regrettably I was unable to attend due to only waking up halfway  
through it.
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/0850.html
Received on Sunday, 23 August 2009 09:49:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:44 GMT