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

Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-147

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 19:28:57 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=-E=kKRoLfjZyPO4RMjdYqy2SfdLueDUsQRhN7@mail.gmail.com>
To: Frank Olivier <Frank.Olivier@microsoft.com>
Cc: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)" <public-html@w3.org>
Frank,

I have just submitted a bug that includes this:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12399

Cheers,
Silvia.


On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Frank Olivier
<Frank.Olivier@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I'd prefer that we still change the spec as proposed in the original ISSUE-147 Change Proposal [1] to make it clear that the user agent might not support the requested rate.   Therefore I am not currently willing to withdraw that Change Proposal for ISSUE-147.
>
> I do agree that adding a metric object should be a separate Last Call issue.  Is someone going to file a separate bug for this requirement?
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Feb/0113.html
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Silvia Pfeiffer [mailto:silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 11:23 AM
> To: Paul Cotton
> Cc: Ian Hickson; Frank Olivier; HTML WG (public-html@w3.org)
> Subject: Re: Change Proposal for ISSUE-147
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com> wrote:
>>> Would you object to adding a metrics feature such as you describe at a later date rather than as part of issue 147?
>>
>> If we got agreement to do this how would it impact the change proposals on the table?
>
> As an answer to this: I'd be happy to retract my change proposal.
>
> Cheers,
> Silvia.
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2011 02:29:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:23 UTC