W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2011

Re: CfC: Close ISSUE-165: rel-pingback by Amicable Resolution

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:23:39 -0400
Message-ID: <4E57F2BB.4050707@intertwingly.net>
To: HTML WG LIST <public-html@w3.org>
At this time, we find that we have consensus on the following proposal 
for ISSUE-165:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jul/0124.html

Bug 12224 will be REOPENED and marked as WGDecision.  Once the editor 
has made the change, ISSUE-165 will be CLOSED.

- Sam Ruby

On 08/17/2011 10:10 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On 07/11/2011 07:12 PM, Paul Cotton wrote:
>> ISSUE-165: rel-pingback - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or
>> Counter-Proposals
>>
>> The current status for ISSUE-165 is as follows:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/165
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-165
>>
>> We currently have one Change Proposal to handle this issue:
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jul/0124.html
>>
>> At this time the Chairs would also like to solicit alternate Change
>> Proposals (possibly with "zero edits" as the Proposal Details), in case
>> anyone would like to advocate the status quo or a different change than
>> the specific one in the existing Change Proposal.
>>
>> If no counter-proposals or alternate proposals are received by Aug 9th,
>> 2011, we will proceed to evaluate the change proposal that we have
>> received to date for ISSUE-165.
>
> Current status: we have received an Change Proposal to remove subsection
> "4.12.4.10 Link type "pingback" and the related entry under "4.12.4 Link
> types":
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jul/0124.html
>
> As we have received no counter-proposals or alternate
> proposals, the chairs are issuing a call for consensus on the proposal
> that we do have. If anybody would like to raise an objection during
> this time, we will require them to accompany their objection with a
> concrete and complete change proposal.
>
> If no objections are raised to this call by August 24th 2011, we will
> direct the editor to make the proposed change, and will only consider
> subsequently reopening this issue based on new information and a
> complete change proposal based on the spec's contents as it exists after
> this change is applied.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 19:24:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:27 UTC