W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: Change Proposals and FPWD Resolutions

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:06:17 -0500
Message-ID: <4B1FD909.6070409@intertwingly.net>
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, public-html@w3.org
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> Put another way, what we are looking for is to see if we can anticipate what
>> formal objections may be produced by whatever decision is made, and to see
>> if we can avoid them.  If it turns out that there will be formal objections
>> any way we go, the co-chairs will select the option that we feel is
>> associated with the weakest set of objections.
> I assume you mean technically weakest, not just the least
> enthusiastic?  I.e., the chairs will go with whichever option they
> believe is better, after considering all rationales presented?  (Or
> maybe the option they think the Director will believe is better?)

Enthusiasm is definitely not the measure.  If somebody enthusiastically 
states an objection that doesn't cite technical arguments, doesn't 
propose changes, and makes a proposal that is both vague and incomplete, 
I have zero problem with forwarding such an individual to the Director 
for consideration.

In fact, the policy has already preemptively stated that such proposals 
will not get serious consideration by the Director:


>> A final note: I want to get this issue behind us, so I very much want to set
>> the expectation that if you fill in a box, and if the co-chairs select that
>> option anyway given that we feel that the objection made is the weaker of
>> the ones presented, that the person who brought this forward WILL be
>> pursuing a Formal Objection in January with the Director.  Those that do not
>> will risk having their subsequent input weighed accordingly.
> Does this apply even if we know someone else will pursue a Formal
> Objection along the same lines?  I assume there's no point in multiple
> people filing basically similar Formal Objections.  Or are you only
> talking about the actual authors of the Change Proposals here?

Given that we are not intending to "do any numerical counting all the 
votes.", I am not interested in a lot of me toos.  The person who wrote 
the Change Proposal doesn't have to be one of the ones with an objection.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 17:06:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:04 UTC