- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 19:41:06 -0400
- To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 05/12/2010 07:30 PM, Jonas Sicking wrote: > On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Sam Ruby<rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >> On 05/12/2010 07:02 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Maciej Stachowiak<mjs@apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> If you would feel you can add information by stating an objection in the >>>> context of the poll, then feel free to do so. Obviously, there is nothing >>>> wrong with agreeing with yourself. >>> >>> So, given that I strongly agree with the CP I participated in, and >>> strongly disagree with the other, but I think all the relevant >>> arguments in the one I disagree with are answered in the one I helped >>> write, is there any reason for me to respond in any way? >>> >>> (I had assumed no.) >> >> A change proposal is only required to have a summary, rationale, proposal >> details, and impact. Note that there is no specific requirement that a >> change proposal contains any objections. >> >> At this point, we are specifically looking for objections. We are merely >> doing that for completeness. If you believe that your objections are >> accurately and completely described by one of the change proposals, there is >> no need to reply further. >> >> If, however, you have anything to add in terms of an objection, now would be >> a good time to indicate what your objection might be. > > Tab describes my question in a much less verbose and confusing way. > > So if I do object to Shelley's proposals, and the reason for this is > that I want the positive aspects described by the "Keep elements" > change proposal, is it ok to state so? I.e. the change proposal > doesn't actually formulate any objections, just states positive > effects of keeping them. > > It sounds like this would be ok (or even encouraged?) It certainly is OK to do so. > What about if someone else already have objected for the same reason? > > It sounds like this is not ok? I would discourage "+1"'s and "me too"'s. I would encourage everyone to focus on presenting additional information. > / Jonas - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 12 May 2010 23:41:38 UTC