Re: minutes: HTML WG Weekly 21 May 2009 [draft]

Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> 
> On May 26, 2009, at 5:23 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
> 
>> Agree.
>> I notice the option for the chair to re-open the discussion if new 
>> information is presented. I'm assuming this would include taking a new 
>> vote on the document.
>>
>> In light of the objections given in this longish discussion thread, 
>> and what seems to have been a lack of addressing such objections, 
>> properly, from the first vote, I believe that Sam Ruby and Chris 
>> Wilson should re-open this topic, formally--including taking a new 
>> vote on the document, and handling any new objections that arise using 
>> the proper procedure.
>>
>> I don't think this would be an onerous burden on the working group, 
>> would it?
> 
> I don't have a problem with holding another vote. However, raising 
> objections or citing problems doesn't have to be tied to a survey. If 
> you have comments you would like to make, then feel free to do so in 
> email to the list.
> 
> I think it would make more sense to just field any outstanding comments, 
> including new ones that come in, and then take a WG decision about 
> publishing the document as a WG Note. In the meantime hopefully we can 
> publish new Working Drafts as appropriate.

+1

> Regards,
> Maciej

P.S. At this time, I am entirely unenthusiastic about holding a vote 
given that the document is in the process of being updated, and (as Anne 
has said[1]): "So far the only vote we took was about publishing it once."

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009May/0434.html

Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 19:11:49 UTC