- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:29:20 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- CC: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 04/30/2010 11:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. 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've responded to Shelley's post off-list[1]. I will now ask that further emails on this subject be taken off-list unless they contain substantially new technical information. Postings to this list containing brief pointers and summaries of results produced elsewhere, however, are fine. > ~TJ - Sam Ruby [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2010Apr/0029.html
Received on Friday, 30 April 2010 16:29:58 UTC