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

Re: ISSUES 90, 91, 93, 96, 97 -- if you DON'T support these change proposals, support zero-change instead

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:26:52 -0500
Message-ID: <l2w643cc0271004300826i871dd726hde7df69f068dabd7@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was hoping to get responses such as those you've asked for.
>> I can't believe that people dislike ALL of the change proposals,
>> equally. I think that the fact that the co-chairs grouped these from
>> the beginning has left them grouped, regardless of what people think
>> about the individual items.
>> If some have less resistance than others, then I can figure out if I
>> need to strengthen my change proposals more, or consider dropping a
>> couple in order to focus on the rest.
>> With them grouped, I'm stymied as to action, because these items are
>> not the same. They are very different constructs. I don't understand
>> the same reasons being applied to ALL the items.
> The same reasons are not applied to all of them; I have no idea why
> you keep asserting this.
> The counter-proposals clearly state the reasoning behind each
> individual element, and why they're valuable.  There is then,
> additionally, a shared section listing some reasoning that is common
> to all the elements.
> ~TJ

I would have believed that more, if the counter-proposals weren't all
lumped together.

Received on Friday, 30 April 2010 15:27:24 UTC

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