Re: [comment] Names and Titles of specifications

I'm not convinced it would be that hard to get a group decision to change titles only on the call tomorrow. 

I am also not convinced I understand what difference it makes either way… if you can both make the call tomorrow perhaps we can take that up quickly.

	Aleecia

On Nov 8, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> Karl,
> 
> The working group made a decision.  That decision is partly based on
> the name and title.  We are not going to revisit that decision just because
> you have a preference.  Sorry, but it is too late.  Even if I agreed with
> your preference, we would still be required to have the WG make another
> formal decision regarding publication -- it is not a trivial change
> because it would require a new call for consensus, not because it would be
> hard to make as editor.
> 
> …Roy
> 
> On Nov 8, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Le 8 nov. 2011 à 15:47, Roy T. Fielding a écrit :
>>> and the TPE short name is supposed to contain dnt because that is the
>>> public handle for what we are doing
>> 
>> 
>> On the client side, it is indeed "DNT". The *WG* Tracking Syntax specification [1]
>> is containing more than that.
>> 
>> * The client request header
>> 4.1 DNT request header field
>> * the DOM interface
>> 4.2 HTML DOM Interfaces
>> * The server answer
>> 5. Communicating a Tracking Status
>> 
>> 1. I would agree with you if we were dealing *only* with the client side. 
>> 2. Second, it's a minor issue to fix now. It would have more consequences later.
>> 3. It doesn't delay the publication of documents. (I can even make the changes if 
>>  it's too much work for you).
>> 
>> 
>> [1]: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-dnt.html
>> 
>> -- 
>> Karl Dubost - http://dev.opera.com/
>> Developer Relations & Tools, Opera Software
>> 
> 
> 
> 

Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 23:50:47 UTC