- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:46:40 -0700
- To: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Apr 6, 2010, at 2:30 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> > wrote: >> On 04/06/2010 05:10 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: >>> >>> I'm not going to formally object to this interesting segue in the >>> procedure, but I believe that anyone that writes one counter to >>> all is >>> doing so with the assumption that the co-chairs and group have >>> already >>> made a decision regardless of the strengths of the argument. This >>> assumption is more likely trigger me to file a Formal Objection if >>> my >>> changes are rejected. >> >> Issues 1 and 2 were decided together. >> > > Same counter-proposal? There's been so many lately, I can't remember > what was what. > > Never mind, I just wasn't aware that we did have a precedent in this > regard. Same Change Proposal for both, and there never was a counter-proposal, we adopted the proposal that was submitted. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 21:47:13 UTC