> Am 07.01.2022 um 18:21 schrieb Lukasz Olejnik (W3C) <lukasz.w3c@gmail.com>: > > > > pt., 7 sty 2022 o 17:19 Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com <mailto:vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com>> napisał(a): > >> Il 07/01/2022 16:48 Lukasz Olejnik (W3C) <lukasz.w3c@gmail.com <mailto:lukasz.w3c@gmail.com>> ha scritto: >> >> >> I don't want to be a party breaker here or anything like that... But to be honest, until there's a final text, we should remain cautious about any definitions/etc. Especially 'amendments'. Just saying: let's be. careful here. > These are not amendments any more, this is the final-for-now text as approved by the Parliament on Dec 15, which was on this list already on Dec 6, since in the end the Parliament only made relatively minor changes to the commission's compromise text. But it's true that next week the trialogues will start, then there will be a final vote by the Parliament and the final-forever text could be different, so at this point in time indeed we can just have preliminary discussions on how things could possibly look. > > My point was indeed that the amendments/etc mean it's still not final. Now the EU Council will finalize theirs, and then the final thing is going to be negotiated. I don't understand. EU has now multiple times asked for technical input. They need it BEFORE decisions. The only time I have ever seen W3C in the discussion was here https://openforumeurope.org/event/ofe-lounge-series-standardisation-and-open-source/ This is now the final stage! > But it's true that next week the trialogues will start, then there will be a final vote by the Parliament After that it is too late and we can only react. So, I am proposing to have a meeting of the ActivityPub Policy Group if this is maybe the wrong group. Personally, I get the impression that W3C is not for people. It seems to be something only for big companies or Trump. Sad.
Received on Monday, 10 January 2022 03:49:21 UTC