- From: Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 03:30:05 +0400
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Thank you. Here is my change proposal for LEGEND element: http://www.w3.org/wiki/User:Mtanalin/legend-placement 22.02.2012, 00:10, "Sam Ruby" <rubys@intertwingly.net>: > On 02/20/2012 07:45 PM, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote: > >> šThanks for clarification. Well, if it's required for considering the >> šissue at all, I would like to try to create proposal in nearest 2-3 >> šdays (this may be treated as my request to extend period for issue >> š200). Thanks. > > That's fine. šI'll change the status of the issue back to raised, and > set a new deadline for the 26th of February. > >> šP.S. To make it more clear for future tracker requests by others, it >> šmaybe makes sense to specify formal-proposal requirement briefly >> šright inside _mailing-list message_ created once issue is raised. >> šDecision-policy document, while maybe formally sufficient, seems to >> šbe too verbose and not enough clear for third-party people who raise >> šissues for the first time (like me). Thanks. > > We already do calls for proposals and make it clear what the > consequences are if we don't receive such a proposal. šIf you think > something more is needed, please open a bug report on the process: > > šššhttp://tinyurl.com/6bpw9pq > > - Sam Ruby > >> š21.02.2012, 04:29, "Sam Ruby"<rubys@intertwingly.net>: >>> šOn 02/20/2012 07:06 PM, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com wrote: >>>> šCould you specify what does this mean? What change proposals are >>>> šassumed? From who? Isn't raising issue itself a sufficient action >>>> šby bug-reporter? Thanks. >>> šHere's a description of what is expected in a change proposal: >>> >>> šhttp://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#change-proposal > > Somebody needs to provide the summary, rationale, proposal details, and > >>> ševaluate the impact of the proposed change. šIf those had been >>> šprovided, we would ask for alternate or counter proposals. >>> šRequests that do not provide this information are deferred to >>> šwhatever might happen to come after HTML5. >>> >>> šIf somebody plans to work on this, and needs a small extension, >>> šthey should make a request now. šThe longer it goes, the less >>> šlikely the chairs are to grant such an extension. >>> >>> š- Sam Ruby >>>> š21.02.2012, 03:56, "Sam Ruby"<rubys@intertwingly.net>: >>>>> šOn 01/17/2012 09:49 AM, Paul Cotton wrote: >>>>>> š'Allow wrapping LEGEND (or new iLEGEND) in non-FIELDSET >>>>>> šelements' >>>>>> >>>>>> šPer the HTML WG Decision Policy, at this time the chairs >>>>>> šwould like to solicit volunteers to write Change Proposals >>>>>> šfor ISSUE-200: >>>>>> >>>>>> šhttp://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/200 >>>>>> šhttp://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html#escalation > > If no Change Proposals are written by February 16th, 2012, this > >>>>>> šissue will be closed without prejudice. >>>>> šAs we have received no change proposals, we are now marking >>>>> šthis issue as closed without prejudice. >>>>>> šIssue status link: >>>>>> šhttp://dev.w3.org/html5/status/issue-status.html#ISSUE-200 >>>>>> >>>>>> š/paulc HTML WG co-chair >>>>>> >>>>>> šPaul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Ottawa, >>>>>> šOntario K2E 6A3 Tel: (425) 705-9596 Fax: (425) 936-7329 >>>>> š- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 23 February 2012 23:30:38 UTC