Re: Formal Objections on REC-track status of polyglot and alt-techniques

On 11/29/2012 12:15 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> That is how Manu framed his objection to Microdata for instance -
> not a Formal Objection yet, but will be if the Working Group decides
> to proceed. That seems like a good way to do things while leaving
> room for a WG decision first.

I have seen Sam's e-mail stating that the objection e-mail I sent the
mailing list will be used as Rationale for a WG poll on the matter. I
will revise that e-mail to include questions raised and answers
delivered and provide additional rationale before December 4th (I do not
need extra time to complete that - I will complete it this weekend). We
all want this resolved, and I want to make it clear that I'm not trying
to stall the process.

When I said that I was going to raise a Formal Objection eventually, my
assumption was that there might be a fast-track decision made without a
HTML WG poll. Since there is now going to be an HTML WG poll on the
matter, if that poll results in consensus around Microdata going to REC,
then I will not raise a formal objection. That is, I will defer to the
members of this group and the decision process in place in the HTML WG,
even if I think it's a mistake to take both specs to REC. I wanted there
to be a thorough discussion on the matter, and I believe that the
discussion is happening and will be further aided by the HTML WG poll.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: The Problem with RDF and Nuclear Power
http://manu.sporny.org/2012/nuclear-rdf/

Received on Friday, 30 November 2012 15:07:50 UTC