- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 10:44:10 -0400
- To: Adrian Bateman <adrianba@microsoft.com>
- CC: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, Chris Wilson <cwilso@microsoft.com>, Tony Ross <tross@microsoft.com>
Adrian Bateman wrote: > On Wednesday, August 19, 2009 11:39 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: >> Chris Wilson wrote: >>> I'm sorry, I thought this issue had been updated already. There's >>> now an IE team member who is working on a proposal; for the time >>> being, I asked that the item be assigned to Adrian Bateman. I think >>> this was at the conference call 2 weeks ago; I think Dan was adding >>> Adrian to Tracker so I could reassign but it never got reassigned. I >>> just did so. >>> >>> (Sorry I can't look up the discussion; w3.org is currently rejecting >>> most page requests due to "abuse from your IP".) >>> >>> That said, of course, if someone wants to volunteer other actions to >>> move the issue forward, I don't think that's a bad idea. >> Changing the owner, in my opinion, that does not change the status. > > Tony Ross has picked up this action. It's closely related to planning work he > has already started. We intend to send a proposal to the working group before > the end of September. I believe a status of OPEN is appropriate given that we > are actively working on this issue. If the group prefers to close the action > and set the status of the issue to raised until we submit that feedback we > wouldn't object to that either. The action can be OPEN and the issue status can be RAISED. I believe that that would effectively represent the current status, per the definition of RAISED: http://esw.w3.org/topic/HTML/#head-47c0b55d661dcf93f76d586ddbe292c9abc597e4 Not being familiar with Tony Ross, if you are OK with it, I would prefer to keep the action assigned to you (Adrian). > Cheers, > > Adrian. - Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 20 August 2009 14:44:53 UTC