- From: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:19:01 -0400
- To: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net>
- CC: "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>, Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>, "Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation)" <mts-std@schunter.org>
Thomas, your answer is non-responsive. Have you taken Roy's recent email into consideration? I'm confused. Are we waiting until Wed to have this discussion or are we going to have it on list? On 7/19/13 10:14 AM, "Thomas Roessler" <tlr@w3.org> wrote: >On 2013-07-18, at 20:38 -0400, Mike Zaneis <mike@iab.net> wrote: > >>> Also of note: "When the Chair believes that the Group has duly >>>considered the legitimate concerns of dissenters as far as is possible >>>and reasonable, the group should move on." >> >> I'm not advocating this decision, but by your standard the Chairs would >>have no choice but to "move on" from the entire June Draft given the >>group's collective dissent to it. The issues that exist in the June >>Draft have been debated for 18 months with little to no progress. For >>probably a dozen issues the group has "considered the legitimate >>concerns" of all sides to no resolution. > >The chairs have layed out a path to get to a conclusion, based on the >June draft and the change proposals that are before the group. We're >through the first decision in that path, pruning a piece of the decision >tree that we're working through. > > > >
Received on Friday, 19 July 2013 14:19:36 UTC