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

Re: Zero-edit Change Proposal for ISSUE-90 figure, ISSUE-91 aside, ISSUE-93 details, ISSUE-95 hidden, ISSUE-96 progress, and ISSUE-97 meter

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:37:13 -0500
Message-ID: <t2x643cc0271004220937ke37bfc2epd21bbe2085f61b45@mail.gmail.com>
To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Cc: "Edward O'Connor" <hober0@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 22, 2010, at 5:03 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 21, 2010, at 7:46 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Several of us have written a zero-edit Change Proposal to keep the
>>>
>>> various new elements, attributes, and controls that are up for
>>>
>>> deletion. You can find our Change Proposal on the WG wiki here:
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/KeepNewElements
>>>
>>>
>>> It's good to see some specifics. I appreciate you all taking the time
>>> to respond to my change proposals.
>>>
>>> Co-Chairs, I ask for some time to respond to this counter-proposal.
>>> I'm assuming that the May 6th deadline is still viable for
>>> counter-proposals. May I have until that time to modify my change
>>> proposals to answer the issues raised in this counter-proposal?
>>>
>>> We're not going to cut conversation off before everyone has had a fair
>>> chance to revise their proposals.
>>> However, since we're not expecting additional alternate proposals or
>>> counter-proposals, now seems a fine time to start discussion.
>>> Regards,
>>> Maciej
>>>
>>
>> Folks can discuss if they wish. I would rather make adjustments in my
>> change proposals in order to respond to new issues raised with this
>> change proposal. Frankly, I don't feel comfortable in participating in
>> discussions in this group.
>>
>> Additionally, just because you're not expecting any other
>> counter-proposals doesn't mean there won't be any. You have recorded a
>> specific date for such counter-proposals. I suggest you honor the
>> date. These items have been treated irregularly from the beginning. I
>> would hope for some consistency at some time in the process.
>
> Hi Shelley,
>
> If you look at the issue status page you can see that I did not remove any
> of the May 6th deadlines. Example:
> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-091>. All I'm saying
> is that the floor is now open for email discussion, if anyone has new
> information to add.
>

Good to get clarification on date.

Frankly, I would welcome discussion. Too little of that related to these items.

> Regards,
> Maciej
>

Shelley
Received on Thursday, 22 April 2010 16:37:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:08 GMT