- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 11:11:04 -0800
- To: John Foliot <jfoliot@stanford.edu>
- Cc: 'Steve Faulkner' <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, 'Paul Cotton' <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, 'HTMLWG WG' <public-html@w3.org>, 'Sam Ruby' <rubys@intertwingly.net>
On Feb 1, 2011, at 11:08 AM, John Foliot wrote: > Steve Faulkner wrote: > >>> Since hgroup has been in the draft for a long >>> time with no significant changes, we are not going to treat this as a >>> post-cutoff change that reduces consensus. >> >> if there is broad agreement that the hgroup text should be removed how is > >> that reducing consensus? >> >>> If we have a poll on this topic, it will at best be advisory. >>> Since hgroup has been in the draft for a long >>> time with no significant changes, we are not going to treat this as a >>> post-cutoff change that reduces consensus. >> >> would have useful to know that the chairs will not allow the html working > >> group members to make any decisions of this nature in one of the earlier >> emails directed at the chairs on this issue. > > While I agree procedurally that this is more likely a post-Last Call issue > rather than a pre-Last Call issue, does it make it any less of an issue? > Conceptually, isn't Last Call the time to shake out these kinds of issues > and problems? Strikes me that before moving from Last Call to Candidate > Recommendation that this will need to be discussed and addressed, and > consensus formed around the issue no matter when in the actual process it > is done. That's definitely the case, and we intent to apply the decision policy as usual. If the bug report on this ends up escalated to a tracker issue, we will treat it as a Last Call issue. All I'm saying is that we do not intend to do anything special outside the bounds of the usual process. Regards, Maciej
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 19:11:39 UTC