- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 23:16:04 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11828 --- Comment #17 from Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net> 2011-05-03 23:16:03 UTC --- (In reply to comment #16) > When I opened this bug, I also submitted some research to bug 11731 and there > was a discussion concerning hgroup and various alternatives on the mailing > list. At that time nobody stepped into the discussion and said that opening a > bug would violate protocol. > > When writing books about HTML5 authors should be aware that the spec is not > stable and things might get moved around. > > I can't see the wisdom in keeping an idea that has flaws just because were too > late into the process. >From what I remember of the discussion on the procedures, bugs would be automatically labeled LC comments. But this item has an issue number, there has been various suggestions submitted as replacement, a decision has not been made. More importantly, I believe this issue is a LC issue item, which means, I thought, that this would be discussed in Last Call. Does the HTML WG have a consistently procedure in place, or not? -- 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 Tuesday, 3 May 2011 23:16:06 UTC