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

Re: Call for a poll of the html wg on removal of hgroup was Re: review of hgroup element prior to last call.

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 13:41:22 -0500
Message-ID: <4D4853D2.5050809@intertwingly.net>
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 02/01/2011 01:03 PM, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> hi Maciej,
>
>  >Since hgroup has been in the draft for a long
>  >time with no significant changes, we are not going to treat this as a
>  >post-cutoff change that reduces consensus.
>
> if there is broad agreement that the hgroup textshould be removed how is
> that reducing consensus?

If there is broad agreement to remove it, the chairs will not intercede. 
  What Maciej is referring to is that the chairs will not ask for a 
change to be reverted from the LC-track draft pending resolution of the 
issue per Enhanced change control after the Last Call cutoff:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Sep/0125.html

>  >If we have a poll on this topic, it will at best be advisory.
>  >Since hgroup has been in the draft for a long
>  >time with no significant changes, we are not going to treat this as a
>  >post-cutoff change that reduces consensus.
>
> would have useful to know that the chairs will not allow the html
> working group members to make any decisions of this nature in one of the
> earlier emails directed at the chairs on this issue.

You are misinterpreting what Maciej said.

> regards
> stevef

- Sam Ruby

> On 1 February 2011 17:47, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net
> <mailto:rubys@intertwingly.net>> wrote:
>
>     On 02/01/2011 12:33 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>
>
>         If we have a poll on this topic, it will at best be advisory. We
>         will
>         follow the usual decision policy for hgroup. Since the bug on
>         hgroup was
>         not filed by the October 1st cutoff, it is not eligible to be
>         treated as
>         a pre-Last Call issue. Since hgroup has been in the draft for a long
>         time with no significant changes, we are not going to treat this
>         as a
>         post-cutoff change that reduces consensus. I do not see anything
>         about
>         hgroup that requires inventing a special ad-hoc process.
>
>
>     +1
>
>         Regards,
>         Maciej
>
>
>     - Sam Ruby
>
>
>
>
> --
> with regards
>
> Steve Faulkner
> Technical Director - TPG
>
> www.paciellogroup.com <http://www.paciellogroup.com> |
> www.HTML5accessibility.com <http://www.HTML5accessibility.com> |
> www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner <http://www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner>
> HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
> dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/ <http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/>
> Web Accessibility Toolbar -
> www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html>
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 18:41:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:21 GMT