Re: Priority of Constituencies proposal

As I interpret this proposal, at this point in the process, it seems
more about "We don't agree with certain other voices in the WG so
rather than working to build real consensus, we'd much rather the
people we disagree with had lower 'priority'".

In the meantime, I encourage anyone with more productive proposals to
submit PRs and issues against the current working drafts. With a
little bit of effort, we ought to be able to do a "final" scrub on the
existing working drafts and get them ready for Candidate
Recommendation by the time we have our face to face in December.

- James

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <a.kuckartz@ping.de> wrote:
> Harry Halpin wrote:
>> I think the process suggestion re "Priority of Constituencies" is rather
>> common-sense - and still useful, as now in addition to specific feeback,
>> we have an *alternative* syntax to AS2.0 being developed in the WG:
>
> The "Priority of Constituencies" document is interesting, but I doubt
> that it would be helpful for this WG.
>
> In my view HTML5 has unnecessarily become a rather monstrous
> specification. Certainly that is not only a result of this process
> document, but both correspond to some extent.
>
> What if users are served best by theoretical purity in the long term ?
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>

Received on Tuesday, 27 October 2015 17:34:19 UTC