- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 08:10:01 -0400
- To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
- CC: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>, "Edward O'Connor (ted@oconnor.cx)" <ted@oconnor.cx>
http://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-200 Change Proposals: * Allow: http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Mtanalin/legend-placement * Keep: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/User:Eoconnor/ISSUE-200 The Allow proposal has sufficient rationale, but the details section is deficient in that it proposes multiple options and does not propose them as a set of edit instructions, specific enough that they can be applied without ambiguity[1]. In particular, the existing Details section uses terms like "could be" and "Another acceptable (and probably even better) option". All Rationale and use case information needs to be moved out of the Details section. What should remain should constitute a single proposal. Should there be a desire to submit multiple proposals, that can be discussed, though the clear preference of the co-chairs would be to have a single proposal. Until this feedback is addressed, the Allow proposal is not accepted. In addition, the rationale section of the Allow proposal is deficient as written. It just states some facts, but does not relate them to a reason for allowing the construct. The first sentence of the Summary section does provide a plausible reason, so perhaps that should be included in Rationale. The Rationale could also be strengthened by providing use cases. The Keep proposal is acceptable as is, but could benefit by addressing the feedback that has already been provided on list[2]. - Sam Ruby [1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v2.html#change-proposal [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Mar/0790.html
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2012 12:10:32 UTC