Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-150, was: ISSUE-150 code-point-verbosity: Chairs Solicit Proposals

hi Areyh,

>Given the number of occurrences in the spec that would have to be
>changed, I think there's a nontrivial risk that some errors would be
>introduced in the process.  So I wouldn't say "None".

I find it difficult to fathom how potential errors introduced by the act of
editing the spec could be put forward as a legitimate risk.


regards
Stevef

On 6 February 2011 00:44, Aryeh Gregor
<Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com<Simetrical%2Bw3c@gmail.com>
> wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> wrote:
> > 4. Risks
> >
> > None.
>
> Given the number of occurrences in the spec that would have to be
> changed, I think there's a nontrivial risk that some errors would be
> introduced in the process.  So I wouldn't say "None".
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html