W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > October 2013

Re: [CSSWG] Minutes Telcon 2013-10-02

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2013 15:13:47 +0200
To: Dael Jackson <daelcss@gmail.com>
Cc: www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <vdqq495hk9gire8dfhc290i5qh4bfa2dqs@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Dael Jackson wrote:
>  - DECISION TAKEN TO EMAIL ON W3C-CSS-WG MAILING-LIST after
>             misunderstanding and invalid decision during call given the
>             request. Correction made by co-chair Daniel (glazou) after
>             end of the call.

Could somebody restate the problem here? The relevant parts seem to be:

>DOMMatrix, DOMPoint and DOMPointLiteral
>----------------------------------------
>
>  Krit1: I'd like to publish a new ED
>  krit1: We combined into Geometry API
>  krit1: It would be with me and Rik as co-editors
>  krit1: Does the WG agree?
>  glazou: No objection about co-editors
>
>  glazou: I'd like to hear about publishing new ED
>  glazou: I don't think you need permission for ED
>  krit1: Ok
>  <SimonSapin> krit1: just ED at this point
>
>  glazou: Any object about co-editors?
>  [silence]
>  RESOLVED: krit and Rik as co-editors for DOMMatrix, DOMPoint and
>            DOMPointLiteral

>[Meeting ended]
>
>  <glazou> krit1, I misunderstood your request today
>  <glazou> you asked for a new ED
>  <krit1> yes
>  <glazou> and that does indeed require WG approval
>  <glazou> I was mistaken, sorry for that
>  <krit1> so do we need to take it up next week again?
>  <glazou> so let me correct things by email and ask if there is any
>           objection
>  <krit1> ok
>  <glazou> if there is no objection, we'll consider resolved
>  <glazou> ok for you?
>  <krit1> glazou: yes, that is fine for me
>  <glazou> thanks krit1 and sorry for the mishmash
>  <glazou> and thanks sgalineau for the heads up
>
>  DECISION TAKEN TO EMAIL ON W3C-CSS-WG MAILING-LIST after
>  misunderstanding and invalid decision during call given the request.
>  Correction made by co-chair Daniel after end of the call.

Where I come from, an editor's draft is what you see when you peek over
an editor's shoulder while they are editing; they are not publications.
And if the Working Group decides to make a change to a draft, say rename
a property, it would seem very strange if the editor of the draft would
have to seek permission to push that change to a source control system;
I am guessing that is what "publishing" an ED amounts to. Perhaps the
decision is about the Working Group adopting a new deliverable under a
new shortname, and not about revising an editor's draft?
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Thursday, 3 October 2013 13:14:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 3 October 2013 13:14:15 UTC