Re: formal objection to one vendor/one vote

David Singer wrote:
> At 9:51  -0400 13/07/09, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> David Singer wrote:
>>> At 7:08  -0400 13/07/09, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>>> At the present time, I am not aware of anybody actually pursuing an 
>>>> alternative to what Ian has proposed in terms of required codecs. 
>>>> Unless I can find an owner for Issue-7, my intent is to (eventually) 
>>>> close it as resolved.
>>> Well, I am aware of people working on some of the issues around 
>>> Ogg/Theora, I am aware of W3C staff member(s) who are looking at the 
>>> situation, I have said several times I have and still am trying to 
>>> pursue solutions when I can (though, I grant you, with nothing to 
>>> report so far), so it's not quite true no-one is working on the problem.
>> I am looking for an owner to that action item.  If you are pursuing 
>> solutions, it might make sense for you to be the owner.  Are you 
>> volunteering?
> as long as there is an open issue on this question, I don't think it 
> will make much practical difference, and assigning my name might be 
> taken as an implication I think I know how to solve the problem (which I 
> don't, but I continue to explore).  so, I guess this is a 'no, let's 
> leave an open un-assigned issue for now'.

My intention is that make there be a very practical difference: issues 7 
has been open since 2007.  Recently, Ian made a provisional decision. 
If nobody steps forward in the next few weeks to take ownership of issue 
7, I am fully prepared to close the issue.

If anyone would like to see this item remain open, I ask them to step 
forward at this time.  If someone does so, I will periodically ask that 
person to report on status.

- Sam Ruby

Received on Monday, 13 July 2009 14:06:37 UTC