ISSUE-6: videoaudio (Pros and cons of keeping video and audio in scope) - suggest closing on 2009-08-20

Sam Ruby and Dan Connolly asked me to resend my proposed issue  
closures in individual emails, with clear subject lines, and Cc'd to  
the issue originator when possible. Apologies for the spam. If there  
are no objections, I will close this issue on 2009-08-20.

------------

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. It has also been somewhat  
overtaken by events - <video> has been in the spec for some time and  
is shipping in a number of browsers. On 2008-06-19, Mike Smith  
suggested closing this issue:

"2008-06-19 17:16:24: the fact that we have already published a two  
WDs with video and audio in them has to some degree made this a moot  
point; this is a candidate for just being closed [Michael(tm) Smith]"

I suggest that we take Mike's advice and close this issue. If anyone  
wants to state an actual objection to <video> and <audio> being in the  
spec, they remain free to do so, and should raise the appropriate  
technical arguments on the list.

(Dan replied to an earlier email on the issue, however I believe he  
does not object to closing.)

Regards,
Maciej