- From: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:06:58 -0800
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
- CC: "julian.reschke@gmx.de" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
> If there's really no way to address this without > many months of work, for what is ultimately an > editorial issue, then I'd have to question whether > it needs to be a showstopper at all. Roy didn't claim it would take many months of work. I don't think anyone asserted that addressing this issue would take many months of work. Roy's claim is that while Hixie continues to make major editorial changes throughout the document, that work put in now would be likely wasted, since Hixie doesn't agree with the editorial changes and could well rewrite the sections again. Is it your assertion that issues that are "ultimately editorial" do not actually need to be addressed? The alternative which is clearly within the chair's discretion is: " With prior permission from the chairs, a high-level prose description of the changes to be made." Given Roy's rationale, I think allowing a change proposal with a high-level prose descriptions of the changes to be made would be useful. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net
Received on Monday, 18 January 2010 18:07:43 UTC