Re: CfC: Publish ten heartbeat drafts as WDs

On 02/27/2012 04:40 PM, Laura Carlson wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> You wrote [1]:
>> If there are no objections by Tue Feb 28 this CfC resolution
>> will carry.
> At this time I object to HTML5: being published.
> Last May several people objected in the HTML Working Group Last Call
> survey that longdesc Issue 30 was not resolved prior to Last Call and
> that longdesc was not in the spec.

Correction: Issue 30 was resolved prior to Last Call.  It was 
subsequently re-opened.

> Because of these objections on May 25, 2011, in the "Responses to Last
> Call survey objections" the Chairs promised to expedite the processing
> of Issue 30 issue during Last Call.
> The Chairs have failed to fulfill their promise. ISSUE-30 longdesc
> deserves to be resolved prior to publishing yet another draft.
> Supporting References:
> Responses to Last Call survey objections
> longdesc Issue 30 deserves to be resolved
> Re: longdesc Issue 30 deserves to be resolved
> The question: "What is the timeline for ISSUE-30?" remains unanswered.
> I realize that the Chairs have the power to discount and overrule this
> request. My hope is that you won't. Please resolve ISSUE-30 before
> publishing a new draft.

You are asking that ISSUE-30 be re-resolved before Jonas and/or Matthew 
have completed their proposal(s).  Proposals that, if successful, could 
cause ISSUE-30 to be once again reopened should it have been re-resolved 
in the interim.

Can you explain the importance of what might very well be a temporary 
resolution of this issue would be?

> Thank you for your consideration.
> Best Regards,
> Laura
> [1]
> --
> Laura L. Carlson

- Sam Ruby

Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2012 10:02:30 UTC