On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:55:00 +0100, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > 'Remove WhatWG and html5.org references in status section of document' > > Per the decision policy, at this time the chairs would like to solicit > volunteers to write Change Proposals. > > http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/151 > http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#escalation > > If no Change Proposals are written by February 6th, 2011 this issue > will be closed without prejudice. > > Issue status link: > http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-151 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/NO-ISSUE-151 Edit at will. I'll revert at will. <rant> Why are editorial and trivial issues like this, ISSUE-145 and ISSUE-139 allowed to reach this stage of the decision process and waste the time of this WG? Why can't the chairs evaluate the issue and take a decision in simple cases? Even the wrong decision is better than going through the Process for ISSUEs that don't have any real-world impact. </rant> -- Philip Jägenstedt Core Developer Opera SoftwareReceived on Saturday, 22 January 2011 22:40:41 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:30 UTC