- From: L. David Baron <dbaron@dbaron.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 16:40:06 -0700
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: public-html-admin@w3.org
On Monday 2013-09-30 16:12 -0400, Sam Ruby wrote (with later correction incorporated):
> A number of individuals either do not understand or do not accept
> that the Director has ruled EME as in scope. The Director has now
> reconfirmed that decision[1]. Any responses that question this
> ruling will not be considered when evaluating the EME heartbeat CfC.
> If you object to the Director's ruling, please take it up with the
> Director.
The director has ruled that EME is in the scope of the working
group. My understanding is that this means that the working group
is *permitted* to publish EME under the group's current charter, but
does not mean that the group is *required* to publish EME. Thus, as
I understand it, the decisions of whether the group should publish
EME or whether the group should address the requirements that led to
EME are still matters left to decisions of the working group. Is
this correct?
-David
>[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-admin/2013Sep/0129.html
--
𝄞 L. David Baron http://dbaron.org/ 𝄂
𝄢 Mozilla https://www.mozilla.org/ 𝄂
Before I built a wall I'd ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And to whom I was like to give offense.
- Robert Frost, Mending Wall (1914)
Received on Monday, 30 September 2013 23:40:30 UTC