- From: Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 01:14:02 +0000
- To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
> Is there a specific reason this item is not going to a survey? Maciej and I discussed the open issues while preparing the agenda and we did not discuss this issue. > Is your agenda item implying that you're issuing a second call for revision? Yes. /paulc Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329 -----Original Message----- From: Shelley Powers [mailto:shelleyp@burningbird.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 8:16 AM To: Paul Cotton; Sam Ruby; Maciej Stachowiak Cc: www-archive Subject: HTML WG telecon 2010-07-08 specific items I read through the agenda items for the HTML WG's next teleconference [1] and had a couple of questions: I notice that Issue 89 is not on the agenda. Is there some reason for a delay on this item? In addition, I noticed the following: > 4. Issues needing revised proposals > Note: The Chairs will be requesting revised proposals for the > following issues. > > a) Issue-31 missing-alt > b) Issue-56 urls-webarch > c) Issue-80 title-alternative > d) Issue-85 anchor-roles > e) Issue-100 srcdoc I believe that you all issued a request for a revised proposals for several of these issues, including Issue 100. And that a deadline of June 30th was given for these updates. Is your agenda item implying that you're issuing a second call for revision? Or that the time has come, and gone, in order to make these revisions, and unrevised proposals are being dropped? Thank you Shelley Powers
Received on Thursday, 8 July 2010 01:14:41 UTC