Re: edits to the draft should reflect the consensus of the WG

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, Robert Burns wrote:
>
> There is nothing in the recent edits regarding @alt and @usemap that has 
> listened to any of the feedback, Instead he spends his time compiling 
> lists and scoring the WGs participants[1]. How does that fit with the 
> process Ian promised to adhere to?
> 
> [1]: <http://junkyard.damowmow.com/290>

I hope you're not suggesting that what I do to amuse myself in my free 
time is any of the working group's concern.

Incidentally I updated the data above to take into account the amount of 
time the participants actually spent from the time of the first e-mail to 
the time of their last e-mail. It includes an 'e-mail per day' average -- 
how many e-mails each participant caused to be sent to the list either by 
writing it or by triggering a reply. You may find the data illuminating: 

   http://junkyard.damowmow.com/291

Cheers,
-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'