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: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:24:05 -0700
Message-ID: <i2r63df84f1004221124n857b7b2dg5b518ef01ee5b766@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Edward O'Connor" <hober0@gmail.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 5:31 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 7:03 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> 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.
>> Shelley
> And evidently, you've also modified the Decision Policy in the meantime.
> It seems that the co-chairs no longer make decisions based on the
> strengths of the arguments, or the rationales given. From the Decision
> Policy, it would seem now that the decisions are based on popularity
> in polls, and votes.
> So, it doesn't matter what I say.

Hmm.. That is not what I'm seeing in the current decision policy. It
does instead seem like if there is no clear result of the poll, there
is a risk of infinite loop where we return to discussions until there
is a clear consensus.

/ Jonas
Received on Thursday, 22 April 2010 18:24:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:01 UTC