W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms-tf@w3.org > April 2008

Re: XForms Simplified Forms Syntax Review Needed

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:56:39 -0700
Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, chris.wilson@microsoft.com, connolly@w3.org, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, Forms WG <public-forms@w3.org>, public-forms-tf@w3.org, steven@w3.org
Message-Id: <F844C130-4D32-4A58-A90C-2EBD7C5B1099@apple.com>
To: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>

Hi John,

On Apr 3, 2008, at 9:06 AM, John Boyer wrote:

> It remains unclear *to me*.
> As explained, it remains unclear *because* the vote preempts the  
> work of a task force both groups were obligated by charter to form  
> to *work together* toward a solution.
> So, you held a vote in which the working group said it did not want  
> to do what it is chartered to do, so are you saying that the vote  
> means the HTML WG should be dissolved?
> That's a bit of hyperbole, but it illustrates what I think is the  
> analogous hyperbole of suggesting that the task force be dissolved  
> because some within it do not even want to consider the notion that  
> a more technically precise approach might actually still align with  
> their HTML WG goals.  Extremism obstructs meaningful collaboration.   
> Meaningful collaboration obstructs extremism.

If you think the HTML WG violated its charter in adopting a particular  
forms spec as its basis for review (note, not a final document), then  
I guess you should take it up with the HTML WG Co-Chairs. I do not  
believe the case, but I am not sure it is worth debating within the  
context of the Forms TF. You may wish to indicate to them which part  
of the HTML WG Charter you feel is violated: <http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter.html 


Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 16:57:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:49:06 UTC