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

Re: requesting one more extension

From: Shelley Powers <shelleypowers@burningbird.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:13:25 -0600
Message-ID: <4B7D9155.10204@burningbird.net>
To: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
CC: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>, Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
My change proposal for Issue 93 is due March 31st.

Has Cynthia's proposal been put forth as a formal change proposal for 
Issue 32? The reason I ask, is that I'll incorporate a counter-proposal 
to the Issue 32 proposal, in conjunction with my Issue 93 change 
proposal. And I suppose the counter is true -- Cynthia's proposal will 
be counter to mine, to remove Details altogether from the spec.

Regardless, the Issue 93 proposal is one I can't do early, I have 
technical proofs I need to create for this one, and they will take time.

Shelley

Paul Cotton wrote:
> The Chairs are considering your extension request.
>
> But in the interim,  could you please let us know how early you could provide your change proposal for ISSUE-93:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/93 
>
> As noted in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2010Feb/0385.html your proposal to eliminate <details> may be in direct conflict with Cynthia's proposal on <summary> for ISSUE-32:
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/32 
>
> /paulc
>
> Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada
> 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3
> Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Shelley Powers
> Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2010 11:19 AM
> To: public-html@w3.org WG
> Subject: requesting one more extension
>
> My apologies to the group and the co-chairs:
>
> I would like one more extension on the time for the change proposals for 
> issues 89, 90, 91, 92, and 98. I'd like to complete these at the same 
> time as I complete the others, on March 31st. I know the group would 
> prefer not having items handled as a lump, but some of the arguments for 
> some of the items, apply to the others, and I can't help thinking it 
> might actually be beneficial to get all of them finished at once. This 
> has worked in the past for specification edits, and can't help thinking 
> it could also work for change proposals and issues.
>
> Plus, I'm really pushing against my book deadline, and am concerned now 
> I'll miss it -- something that's not helped by me getting sick.
>
> I also volunteer, before you even ask the group, to write a change 
> proposal for ISSUE-100, which could also apply to issue 103. I'd finish 
> it at the same time, March 31. In fact, I'm going to try to have all my 
> concerns written in change proposal format by March 31, even if the text 
> is entered into a bug rather than written as part of a change proposal. 
> I figured if it does become an issue and change proposal, the work is 
> done ahead of time.
>
> I appreciate the group and the co-chairs consideration of this request.
>
> Shelley
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2010 19:14:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:02 GMT