Re: process Re: omitting alt: closing an open ...

in other wg, we get issue settlement proposals unless we state othe wise and 
respond to them with yay, nay, discuss...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <>
To: "Dan Connolly" <>; "Laura Carlson" 
Cc: "Michael(tm) Smith" <>; "Al Gilman" 
<>; "Steve Faulkner" <>; 
"Gregory J. Rosmaita" <>; <>; "HTML WG" 
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 11:51 AM
Subject: process Re: omitting alt: closing an open ...

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:06:51 +0200, Dan Connolly <> wrote:

> It might be nice if the tracker had more states
> than raised/open/closed, but meanwhile, Ian and
> I have chatted about this, and the technical
> constraints being what they are, he has offered
> to let us know that he's caught up on email on
> a an issue by marking them 'closed', and I agreed
> that's useful.

Which seems a priori sensible. Maybe we could imprve on it by raising an
action on the editor to consider each issue, so he can close that when he
considers that he has done so, as a trigger to review it and see if the
working group agrees?

I am sure that there are better ideaas than this, or better versions of
this idea. But it seems to me an improvement on the current process.
(Flames/thoughts/constructive criticism/constructive criticism welcome :) )



Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
     je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk   Try Opera 9.5:

Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 16:41:50 UTC