- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 22:36:45 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12734
Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3cbug@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |Simetrical+w3cbug@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3cbug@gmail.com> 2011-05-25 22:36:43 UTC ---
By "provided they prove uncontroversial", I meant to imply that if they proved
uncontroversial ex post facto, they could be left in with no procedural qualms
even if there was no bug filed. If someone objected, they could be reverted
after the fact. This simply makes it simpler to change the spec in the fairly
common case that the editor can predict in advance that the change will be
uncontroversial. If he's wrong sometimes, there's no harm done -- he can be
asked to revert it. As long as a large majority of changes are
uncontroversial, which I believe has historically been the case, this optimizes
for the common case and saves effort overall. By contrast, requiring up-front
discussion across the board adds process burden even in the large majority of
cases where it won't change anything.
--
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 Wednesday, 25 May 2011 22:36:46 UTC