- From: Gareth Hay <gazhay@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 20:09:01 +0100
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 3 May 2007, at 17:51, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > > On May 2, 2007, at 10:48 AM, Dan Connolly wrote: > >> Indeed, we're not after consensus by attrition. > > It seems to me that if there is disagreement on fundamental issues > (such as whether to be compatible with past versions of the > language), and our goal is consensus, there are only a few ways to > proceed: > > 1) Advocates of one side of the argument change their minds. > 2) Advocates of one side of the argument leave. > 3) We stop work. > 4) We proceed over the objections of some, given strong arguments > and a rough consensus of a large part of the group. > > Right now I think we're taking approach #3. I hope at some point we > will move on to #4, if we see no signs of #1 or #2 occurring. > As you know, I can very close to #2, and am still undecided but am hanging on for now. Could we perhaps get some kind of survey to view the numbers of supporters and objectors to the various error handling options? Gareth
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 19:09:13 UTC