- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:13:50 +0200
- To: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "Al Gilman" <alfred.s.gilman@ieee.org>
- Cc: "Steve Faulkner" <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, wai-xtech@w3.org, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:28:09 +0200, Laura Carlson
<laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> How can an HTMLWG open issue be closed if it already has an action
> item is bound to it and that action item is in progress?
...
By consensus of the working group - something that has clearly not been
achieved yet.
> Just minutes after that, Dan sent a message to html-public that said:
> "I'm inclined to let 'open' mean we have a clear plan or next step for
> working on it, vs 'raised"' which means it's probably an issue but
> nobody has volunteered to address it or move it forward." [9]
>
> So I ask, how can issue 31 be closed if it already has an action item
> 54 bound to it and that action item is in progress and has volunteers?
Looks like an administrative error to me. Reopening for now.
chaals
--
Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group
je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 10:15:19 UTC