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

Re: ISSUE-90 - Removing the figure Element - Straw Poll for Objections

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 18:55:40 -0700
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <1830516D-8483-453A-AD0D-5D471B5AD07F@apple.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>

On May 12, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote:

>>  good time to indicate what your objection might be.
> 
> Tab describes my question in a much less verbose and confusing way.
> 
> So if I do object to Shelley's proposals, and the reason for this is
> that I want the positive aspects described by the "Keep elements"
> change proposal, is it ok to state so? I.e. the change proposal
> doesn't actually formulate any objections, just states positive
> effects of keeping them.
> 
> It sounds like this would be ok (or even encouraged?)

That kind of thing would be ok.

> What about if someone else already have objected for the same reason?
> 
> It sounds like this is not ok?

We discourage repeating arguments, but it's not forbidden, particularly if you think you can state the case better. Just keep in mind that we are looking for new information, not "me too"s.

In hopes of clarifying further, Sam and I agreed that the four answers on the ISSUE-66 survey to date meet our expectations for survey responses:
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/40318/issue-66-objection-poll/results

So you can look to those as examples.

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Thursday, 13 May 2010 01:56:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:17 UTC