- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:41:12 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8892 --- Comment #7 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2010-02-08 13:41:12 --- As the folks in the WhatWG IRC were kind enough to point out[1], the danger to making counter-proposal edits directly to the HTML5 specification is that people don't necessarily know what that document is, and they may think it represents a consensus view at _any_ point in time. Sure, the same people can come back in a week and the section is changed, but very few people outside of this group will check back to see if the section they view on one day, is different on another. We also need to work on equal footing in this team, and that includes all using the same means to discuss a change. Email is this formal means, which we have all agreed on. No, to prevent confusion, as well as prevent what may be perceived as an act of antagonism, when a section is under active debate--with formal change proposal(s), and an assigned issue--it should be locked out of change. We don't have to use technology to attempt to do so, it should come about by explicit directive of the co-chairs. [1] http://www.precentral.net/html5-editors-draft-hits-w3c-flash-doesnt-break-sweat -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 8 February 2010 13:41:16 UTC