- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 12:17:11 -0600
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> wrote: > Hi Ian & Shelley, > > Let's not fight over blame or needle each other, but rather look for > constructive ways to make good progress. In particular: > > => At this time it does not look to me like editorial actions by Ian are the > long pole on getting to last call. Our oldest open bug is much more recent > than our oldest open issue. > > => It looks like we now have a process with a good chance of getting the > open issues resolved. Let's give it a chance to work. > > => If the chairs at some future point conclude that resolving bugs is the > bottleneck, we will address the issue. > > Regards, > Maciej > That's an excellent response, Maciej. And very good points. I also agree that the Change Process should help, and will try to practice patience. I believe one area where Ian and I agree is we're both anxious to see HTML5 progress, and that can make me, at least, impatient. It's time to turn my attention to other things for a time. Thanks, much, and Happy Holidays. Shelley > On Dec 10, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Ian Hickson wrote: > >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Shelley Powers wrote: >>> >>> With Ian's commitments to so many specifications, we need to consider >>> starting off next year with a discussion about adding a couple of new >>> editors, to help ease the burden placed on one man. >> >> If anyone would like to edit anything, I'm more than happy to help getting >> people up to speed. There are literally dozens of critical specs in the >> Web standards space that desperately need more editors. So yes, please, if >> you can bring in more editors, do so. >> >> I work on the number of specs that is necessary to make good progress on >> all of the specs that I work on. This is why, for instance, I stay on >> schedule -- back in 2006 (before the W3C started work on HTML5), I >> predicted that we would reach zero open issues in the WHATWG in October >> 2009, and that is exactly what happened. Meanwhile, the W3C HTML WG was >> formed with the charter stating that Last Call (zero issues) would be >> reached in June 2008 -- at which point the HTMLWG's issue tracker was >> still more than a year from reaching its peak of open issues. So the >> numbers don't suggest that I'm overwhelmed with work, they suggest the >> HTML WG is overwhelmed with work. >> >> (I already said all this here: >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0195.html >> ...but you didn't reply, and instead just repeated your statement again. >> I would appreciate it if we as a working group could rely on people not >> repeating arguments after they've already been responded to, without >> acknowledging those responses and adjusting the arguments accordingly.) >> >> -- >> Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >> > >
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 18:17:46 UTC