- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:14:46 -0500
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I was hoping to get responses such as those you've asked for. >>>> >>>> I can't believe that people dislike ALL of the change proposals, >>>> equally. I think that the fact that the co-chairs grouped these from >>>> the beginning has left them grouped, regardless of what people think >>>> about the individual items. >>>> >>>> If some have less resistance than others, then I can figure out if I >>>> need to strengthen my change proposals more, or consider dropping a >>>> couple in order to focus on the rest. >>>> >>>> With them grouped, I'm stymied as to action, because these items are >>>> not the same. They are very different constructs. I don't understand >>>> the same reasons being applied to ALL the items. >>> >>> The same reasons are not applied to all of them; I have no idea why >>> you keep asserting this. >>> >>> The counter-proposals clearly state the reasoning behind each >>> individual element, and why they're valuable. There is then, >>> additionally, a shared section listing some reasoning that is common >>> to all the elements. >> >> I would have believed that more, if the counter-proposals weren't all >> lumped together. > > I made a statement of fact. There is nothing to believe or > disbelieve. You can just look at the page and clearly see the > individual elements being given individual justifications, which > invalidates your statement that "the same reasons [are] being applied > to ALL the items", and weakens your claim of prejudice-by-grouping. > > The number of wiki pages spent to argue a position has no bearing on > the strength of the argument or the validity of the position. > > ~TJ > Actually, it does have a bearing. If people support the change proposal for Issue 93, but not the one for Issue 96, there's only one counter-proposal, and it encompasses both Issue 93 AND Issue 96. They are supporting the counter-proposal for ALL the items. There is no individual discussion. It's all, or nothing. Shelley
Received on Friday, 30 April 2010 16:15:21 UTC