Re: June Change Proposals

John:

The issues that we plan to address during the coming Wednesday calls are
the ones that people raise as change proposals.  Members of the group will
raise comments, objections, and proposed changes to the change proposals.
We will seek consensus.  If we don't get consensus, we will do the Chairs
process as necessary.

Best,

Peter



Prof. Peter P. Swire
C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
	Ohio State University
240.994.4142
www.peterswire.net

Beginning August 2013:
Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor
Law and Ethics Program
Scheller College of Business
Georgia Institute of Technology






-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Doty <npdoty@w3.org>
Date: Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:58 AM
To: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>
Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org List" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject: Re: June Change Proposals
Resent-From: <public-tracking@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Sunday, June 23, 2013 12:58 AM

>On Jun 22, 2013, at 4:21 PM, John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>
>wrote:
>
>> I am confused. I am sorry I am obtuse. Is it the case that all previous
>>"open issues" are deemed closed unless they are specifically raised
>>against the "June draft?"
>
>Hi John,
>
>Thanks for asking clarifying questions, I think it will help all of us.
>Based on the discussion on the last teleconference, we won't be closing
>all other issues, but will raise new issues (or migrate existing issues
>which track exactly the same questions) on the Compliance June product.
>That list will give us a priority list to work through, manage change
>proposals and do Calls for Objection as necessary. The chairs are asking
>that if you have a change proposal for the June draft (now the editors'
>draft), even for an existing open issue, you propose it to the group.
>
>> It took me a while to figure out how to get the "June Product" issues
>>tracker.  For those colleagues trying to master this, you can please try
>>this link:
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/5
>
>Yes, that's the link, apologies, I should have sent that around earlier.
>
>‹Nick

Received on Sunday, 23 June 2013 14:02:39 UTC