- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:53:26 -0400
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Ben Adida wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote: >>> I *was* talking about the HTML WG, and so were you when this discussion >>> was initially brought up: >>> >>> "For better or worse, the HTML WG is operating under a CTR process." >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009May/0063.html >> I mispoke. > > Ok, but the facts on the ground speak for themselves: micro-data was > included in the spec without any attempt at consensus, and now it's > about to go out as a working draft, again without any attempt at consensus. I stopped reading your email at this point. I believe that have been attempts at consensus and that you and everybody else in the working group has every opportunity to influence this. As evidence, I will cite the following four emails: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0885.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0921.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0922.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0924.html I will further state that the *ONLY* reason that the RDFa draft isn't going to be an option on Monday's poll is the following email: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Jul/0938.html I suggest you take the time to read the emails I cited and to talk with Manu. - Sam Ruby
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 21:54:09 UTC