W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: change proposal for issue-86, was: ISSUE-86 - atom-id-stability - Chairs Solicit Proposals

From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 12:11:07 -0700
Message-ID: <m2w63df84f1004091211wfb1e2331v6c9e1279ce3ef0e2@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On 04/09/2010 10:04 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>> Note: the removal of this part should be applied to all variants of the
>> spec, be it in W3C space or not.
>
> Paraphrasing Maciej[1]:
>
> As a side note, be aware that a Change Proposal cannot stop anyone from
> proposing any additional drafts they want. A Change Proposal can only change
> existing drafts or propose new drafts. Thus, the sentence quoted above
> cannot be fulfilled by adopting a Change Proposal.  We[2] suggest removing
> this sentence for clarity. If this Change Proposal is adopted by the Working
> group without that sentence being removed, then that specific sentence will
> be considered inoperative.

Additionally, I don't see how a W3C decision could affect non-W3C
documents, such as the WhatWG copy, which it seems like the above text
is trying to mandate?

/ Jonas
Received on Friday, 9 April 2010 19:12:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:07 GMT