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

Re: Why I don't attend the weekly teleconference (Was: Input on the agenda)

From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:55:10 -0700
Message-ID: <19010.26750.286137.271699@retriever.mtv.corp.google.com>
To: mike@w3.org
Cc: shelley.just@gmail.com, ian@hixie.ch, public-html@w3.org
Mcihael, based on what you say, I'm curious to know what if
anything  happened to the document you yourself started --- from
all appearances it seems to be dead and buried.

Michael(tm) Smith writes:
 > Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, 2009-06-23 19:03 -0500:
 > 
 > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Ian Hickson<ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
 > > Unlike you and Sam, I'm not paid to waste my time writing material
 > > that I know will be rejected.
 > 
 > As far as this working group goes, I think it's clear that any
 > material you might write is not going to be rejected. After he
 > came on as co-chair of the group, Sam outlined a mechanism for
 > having additional/alternative HTML-WG-member-edited drafts move
 > forward for discussion within the group and publication by the
 > group. I know Chris Wilson supports that, and I'd think it'd be
 > safe to say the majority of members of this group also support it.
 > 
 > > While you're a gatekeeper I won't play the gam.
 > 
 > Hixie is not the gatekeeper for decisions about what gets
 > published by this group.
 > 
 > > I will spend my time writing, but it will be in the nature of
 > > formal objections, which cannot be ignored.
 > 
 > IMHO, the most useful kind of formal objections are those that
 > take the form of a concrete proposal -- a document with (as Sam as
 > described it), "camera-ready spec text".
 > 
 > And I would think that at the point in the publication cycle where
 > resolving formal objections is necessary (document transitions --
 > e.g., from WD to LC, or LC to CR), the arbitrator responsible for
 > resolving those is very likely to value having concrete proposals
 > or alternative drafts to consult when evaluating them.
 > 
 > That said, I'm not saying the objections necessarily need to reach
 > that point (or should).
 > 
 >   --Mike
 > 
 > -- 
 > Michael(tm) Smith
 > http://people.w3.org/mike/

-- 
Best Regards,
--raman

Title:  Research Scientist      
Email:  raman@google.com
WWW:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/
Google: tv+raman 
GTalk:  raman@google.com, tv.raman.tv@gmail.com
PGP:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/raman-almaden.asc
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 17:55:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:04 UTC