- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 02:06:14 -0800
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On Nov 9, 2012, at 7:07 AM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>> Lacking such bug reports >> >> I had the text of the first message to this thread open in a Bugzilla >> textarea when I specifically asked Paul if the requirement to have a >> bug report on file is waived in this case. I didn’t file a bug, >> because Paul indicated that voice communication at the meeting plus >> sending the email would suffice to invoke the relevant part of the >> Decision Process in this case. > > Creative snipping there. Whatever might have been said or what you might have thought you heard, I will once again state that the process is quite clear that the next step after the editors initial decision is indeed a bug report: > > http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy-v3.html#note-vs-rec We have bug reports on the normativity status of polyglot: <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12725> And also alt-techniques: <https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12726> At the F2F I agreed (with Paul's concurrence, though without the opportunity to consult with Sam) to request rationale statements and move to a preference poll on these without requiring the formalities of escalation. For clarity, I have now added TrackerRequest to the bugs. I apologize if this was unclearly minuted or if I failed to communicate it clearly in co-chair discussions. Regards, Maciej
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2012 10:06:43 UTC