- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:27:21 -0500
- To: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Laura Carlson wrote: > Hi Ian, > >> I was (and still am) trying to follow the process, > > That is good. > >> and trying to resolve the bugs Shelley filed in a manner >> consistent with the chairs' decision on Microdata. I prefer the term WG decision. > That may be a source of the confusion. > > Sam, Maciej, and Paul is/was the Microdata decision meant to set > precedent and design principle and be applied to all bugs/issues? > > Or was the poll and decision particular to Microdata? The poll and decision itself was intended to be interpreted narrowly. That being said, the key phrase in the WG Decision was "The objections based on maturity, market success, and reusability in other languages are stronger than their respective counterpoints." It may very well be the case that similar considerations would apply to other situations. - Sam Ruby
Received on Sunday, 10 January 2010 00:27:53 UTC