- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 11:24:15 -0400
- To: "Edward O'Connor (ted@oconnor.cx)" <ted@oconnor.cx>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On 04/17/2012 08:20 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > No_edit: > http://www.w3.org/wiki/No_edit_change_proposal_for_canvas_text_editing > > No_edit does not address the use cases provided. It asserts that the > rationale is "well reasoned" without providing justification for this > assertion. It also makes other assertions such as "superior" and "more > accessible" without providing any supporting evidence or addressing the > original proposal. > > The details section is incomplete in that it lists examples of things > that could be added instead of providing a set of edit instructions, > specific enough that they can be applied without ambiguity. If the details section is not corrected by May 17th, the chairs will consider this proposal to be withdrawn. - Sam Ruby
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2012 15:24:47 UTC