- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 08:36:33 -0400
- To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- CC: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Shelley Powers wrote: > > I notice the option for the chair to re-open the discussion if new > information is presented. I'm assuming this would include taking a new > vote on the document. > > In light of the objections given in this longish discussion thread, and > what seems to have been a lack of addressing such objections, properly, > from the first vote, I believe that Sam Ruby and Chris Wilson should > re-open this topic, formally--including taking a new vote on the > document, and handling any new objections that arise using the proper > procedure. > > I don't think this would be an onerous burden on the working group, > would it? A prior version of this document was approved by this working group as a Working Draft. Citing the /2005/ W3C Technical Report Development Process[1]: Consensus is not a prerequisite for approval to publish; the Working Group MAY request publication of a Working Draft even if it is unstable and does not meet all Working Group requirements. The document is in the process of being updated. I suggest we wait until that update is complete before assessing how to proceed. > Shelley - Sam Ruby [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html#first-wd
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 12:37:13 UTC