- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:39:20 -0700
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Aug 13, 2009, at 3:37 PM, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Mon, 2009-08-10 at 22:19 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/6 >> >> This issue is based on an email of mine responding to Chris Wilson, >> in >> a dicussion of pros and cons of the <video> and <audio> elements. The >> issue doesn't really propose an action. > > Are issues supposed to propose actions? I thought they were supposed > to be somewhat neutral on the possible outcomes. Anyway... I guess what I meant was, it's not clear to me from reading the issue what action might resolve it. > This is part of an attempt on my part to do a certain amount of > explicit requirements negotiation. Whenever I noticed a big chunk > of stuff in the HTML 5 spec that wasn't in the HTML 4 spec, I put > it in the issues list under the requirements product to ensure > that the WG is somewhat conscious/explicit about accepting > requirements. I think that was a very sensible approach earlier in WG history. Now I would like to help make the Issue Tracker a tool that we can use to track progress towards Last Call. I think that means clearing up issues where we don't intend to take action. I believe we are agreed on the bottom line for this issue, mainly I wanted to clarify my intent. Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 13 August 2009 23:40:01 UTC