- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 19:35:03 -0400
- To: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- CC: public-html@w3.org
On 06/01/2010 06:45 PM, Shelley Powers wrote: > > Neither of the decisions addresses the other HTML audiences, such as web > developers, designers, tech writers, tool builders, and so on. I personally spent considerable time scanning the web to see if I could substantiate the claims that these elements were too complex for these audiences. What I found instead was plenty of instances where people were welcoming these changes, often eagerly. As an aside, I personally find claims made by a party that these elements may be too complex for a third party to be weaker than claims made by the persons affected. If such people were to step forward and detail actual impact that affects them personally then that could very well be treated as new information. > It shows that the decisions were made even before the survey, and the > co-chairs picked among the arguments, as justification. That certainly was not the case for me, nor do I believe it to be the case for the other co-chairs. In any case, if anybody believes that to be true then such a claim would be a valid basis for an appeal: http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#WGAppeals > Shelley - Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 1 June 2010 23:35:34 UTC