W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapi@w3.org > June 2007

Re: [selectors-api] The Naming Debate

From: Martijn <martijn.martijn@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 23:58:16 +0200
Message-ID: <6c97b8b10706271458y6f4b9041yb17361b1f36258e8@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Doug Schepers" <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>
Cc: "Jean-Yves Bitterlich" <Jean-Yves.Bitterlich@sun.com>, public-webapi <public-webapi@w3.org>, "Lachlan Hunt" <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>

2007/6/27, Doug Schepers <doug.schepers@vectoreal.com>:
> Hi, Jean-Yves-
> Jean-Yves Bitterlich wrote:
> >
> > We find it unfortunate that past resolutions within the working group are being
> > invalidated (unless of course there are new evidences/information that justify
> > this act) in particular because this behavior leads to rehashing issues instead
> > of moving forward.
> I could not agree more with this sentiment.  I know of no reason this
> issue should have been reopened, since there was no new evidence.  But
> ultimately, it is not that important, which makes it all the more
> frustrating that it was reopened and effort was wasted.

Yeah, this is a "me too".
However, I do think this is important.
So basically, I'm just really unhappy about this.
Just posting a new proposal, without even mentioning about what was
decided before, it's just very frustrating to me :(
I feel being treated very unfairly :(

> > However, and for the sake of progress, we will go along with the new decision
> > taken in consensus by the WebAPI WG.
> That's very gracious of you.  It's important that we use consensus to
> move forward, rather than to block progress.

Well, I won't "block any progress" from now on :(


> Regards-
> -Doug
Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2007 21:58:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:23 UTC