- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:20:35 -0800
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Mar 9, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Shelley Powers wrote: > I've noticed in the dt/dd issue and now with Issue 66 that people > are providing multiple change proposals, or introducing additional > changes not necessarily reflecting on the issue at hand. These > actions make it more difficult to determine exactly what the person > wants, specific to the item under discussion. This goes counter to > my assumption that when people write a change proposal, it's in > actuality a concise argument for a specific action, and that this > action is what the person prefers. That's not how I see the purpose of Change Proposals. As I see it, they are a tool to help build WG consensus. A Change Proposal author should definitely seek to modulate their proposal based on what they think will fly with the Working Group. There is no requirement that a Change Proposal must represent the authors own most preferred option. A participant who can live with multiple alternatives and is not sure which would be more preferred by the WG can certainly submit multiple proposals if they wish. Ultimately, the most relevant question is not what a Change Proposal author really truly wants, but rather what position can find the most consensus and draw the weakest objections. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 9 March 2010 17:21:08 UTC