W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > November 2014

Re: WHATWG/W3C collaboration proposal

From: Domenic Denicola <d@domenic.me>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 19:07:48 +0000
To: "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <0cd791cd1ff4410db85609d1b491aeaf@CY1PR0501MB1369.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
> I disagree (see below)

I don't understand what you disagree with, even after reading the below. You quote your blog post:

>> In particular, they are interested in evidence of wide review, evidence that issues have been addressed, evidence that there are implementations, and the IPR commitments that are captured along the way.

In what ways is achieving these incompatible with the principle I stated, or with the examples I gave of how to satisfy it? Most of my concerns were about the snapshot document itself, whereas the things you mention are about process, issue tracking, testing, implementation reports, IPR submission forms... They seem unrelated.
Received on Tuesday, 25 November 2014 19:08:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:13 UTC