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 11:14:46 -0500
Message-ID: <s2n643cc0271004300914u8fb6fce5td91487807875b5db@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 11:01 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>> I would have believed that more, if the counter-proposals weren't all
>> lumped together.
> I made a statement of fact.  There is nothing to believe or
> disbelieve.  You can just look at the page and clearly see the
> individual elements being given individual justifications, which
> invalidates your statement that "the same reasons [are] being applied
> to ALL the items", and weakens your claim of prejudice-by-grouping.
> The number of wiki pages spent to argue a position has no bearing on
> the strength of the argument or the validity of the position.
> ~TJ

Actually, it does have a bearing.

If people support the change proposal for Issue 93, but not the one
for Issue 96, there's only one counter-proposal, and it encompasses
both Issue 93 AND Issue 96.

They are supporting the counter-proposal for ALL the items. There is
no individual discussion. It's all, or nothing.

Received on Friday, 30 April 2010 16:15:21 UTC

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