W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: splits, discussions, and manic behavior

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 19:27:21 -0500
Message-ID: <4B491EE9.3090002@intertwingly.net>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:56 UTC