- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 15:02:35 -0400
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On May 26, 2009, at 5:23 AM, Shelley Powers wrote: > >> Agree. >> 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? > > I don't have a problem with holding another vote. However, raising > objections or citing problems doesn't have to be tied to a survey. If > you have comments you would like to make, then feel free to do so in > email to the list. > > I think it would make more sense to just field any outstanding comments, > including new ones that come in, and then take a WG decision about > publishing the document as a WG Note. In the meantime hopefully we can > publish new Working Drafts as appropriate. +1 > Regards, > Maciej P.S. At this time, I am entirely unenthusiastic about holding a vote given that the document is in the process of being updated, and (as Anne has said[1]): "So far the only vote we took was about publishing it once." [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009May/0434.html
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 19:11:49 UTC