W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2011

Re: ISSUE-127: link-type-flags - Straw Poll for Objections

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:49:16 -0500
Message-ID: <4D7AD11C.8060602@intertwingly.net>
To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>
CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 03/11/2011 08:33 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2011, at 4:27 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> What we have said to date is that nobody should assume that we will
>> look at anything other than the Change Proposal and objections
>> presented.  In more recent decisions, we have tried to hold more
>> closely to that principle, but we do allow people to post their
>> objections to www-archive or public-html and reference them via a
>> URI.
> That's incredibly annoying.  Is the list discussion considered or
> not?  The selection and timing of straw polls is arbitrary at best
> and certainly not aligned with the free time of respondents. The
> commentary on list should be wrapped up and referenced as part of the
> poll, just like it is done in other W3C groups.

The purpose of change proposals is to get people who care about an issue 
an opportunity to do exactly that: wrap up and reference everything that 
is needed for a poll.

At a minimum, we give everybody a full month to produce change 
proposals.  Generally, this works out to be much more than that.

As to polls, they run for a minimum of a week.  I am familiar with other 
organizations where 72 hours is considered sufficient.

> ....Roy

- Sam Ruby
Received on Saturday, 12 March 2011 01:49:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:33 UTC