Re: Why Design Principles?

Maciej Stachowiak On 09-06-03 01.39:
> 
> On Jun 2, 2009, at 4:00 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> 
>> Maciej Stachowiak On 09-06-02 23.54:
>>> On Jun 1, 2009, at 8:11 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:

>>> Ian and Anne both suggested that I should add most of this 
>>> justification to the Design Principles document itself. I will likely 
>>> replace the current abstract and introduction with something based on 
>>> this email. I suggest that those with an interest in the Design 
>>> Principles should voice their objections to this plan.
>>
>> I object.
>>
>> If you want to document how onesided and rooted in the WHATwg reality 
>> - aka "invented there" - the principles you have been authoring are, 
>> then please go on.
> 
> I have no problem with being honest about the origin of the principles, 
> or the reaction to them by the HTML WG. I think everything I said above 
> is accurate, and reasonably neutral in tone.
> 
>> I would suggest to have _less_ introduction than in the 2007 version. 
>> As little as possible.
> 
> I'm starting to get the impression you'll just disagree with anything I 
> propose, even if that means reversals of your prior positions. That
 > makes it hard to take your feedback into account.

Don't ask for objections if you don't want to see any. Btw, I see 
Sam's point with regard to disclaimer - may be that is a point.

Not sure what you mean by "reversal of your prior positions". Yes, 
I have been in favour of parking the principles. But you have been 
deaf on that ear. Are you disappointed that I instead suggest how 
I want them?
-- 
leif halvard silli

Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2009 00:00:27 UTC