Re: two general change proposals, problems

I agree with David's analysis. Neither proposal conformed to the procedures that were set forth. Both should be dismissed and totally ignored.

I do not understand why we would discuss the DAA a proposal.

I would have submitted a total package if that was asked for.

It was not.

I try to play by the rules and am extremely disappointed that others have opted for a choice that undermines the entire process.

Cheers,
John


On Jul 2, 2013, at 5:29 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:

> We have
> 
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Add_to_Last_Working_Draft
> 
> and a 'DAA text' which (as far as I can see) is not on the Wiki at all, but is on the agenda for tomorrow.
> 
> Neither give any information as to what about the replacement text is considered an important change, or what's editorial or minor, why the changes are needed, and so on.
> 
> I thought we were asked to provide specific change proposals, with reasons, and we are working collaboratively to work through them.  I have (as the mailing list shows) done a first pass for the specific change proposals on the table.
> 
> I cannot do that for either of these, and have not tried to do so.  "Replace the entire text with this" is not a change proposal, in my mind, and I am unable to evaluate its merits if they are unexplained.
> 
> 
> I find myself in a position where it's hard to comment on or contribute to such an approach, and I find it at odds with what the chairs asked for and our apparent direction.
> 
> 
> David Singer
> Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>

Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 02:00:56 UTC