- From: イアンフェッティ <ifette@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 16:59:45 -0800
- To: Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Cc: Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>, Tracking Protection Working Group <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAF4kx8cifU1wCKJYuVnAwONDR4WOrpttm_WGVzoeCYqk-Ko77Q@mail.gmail.com>
Ralph, Can you perhaps comment on why support for this objection is being solicited in the form of emails to ac-forum rather than as a poll? Is this common? Peter, Regardless of what happens with the formal appeal now making its way through the process, I would encourage you to take it not as a personal slight but rather a manifestation of a long-standing concern that has been raised repeatedly within the group and underlies many of the discussions the group has had and continues to have. I understand the desire to make speedy progress towards a tangible result, but if people don't agree in which direction we should be running it's unlikely we'll arrive at the finish line as a group. -Ian (as an individual) On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org> wrote: > Peter wrote on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 09:42:05 -0800 > ... > > Since Boston, we are working each week on text and specific action > items. I have contemplated narrowing the range of outstanding issues to > get us to a good place a realistic goal at the next face-to-face of > having good text on each of the issues. With the normal clean-up of > wording, that puts us in the June/July time frame for Last Call, as > contemplated in the new schedule. The subsequent stages, as I understand > it, are standard periods for receiving public comments, etc. > > > > This June/July timeframe is the exact schedule I spoke of with many of > you when I agreed to come on board on the first place. It is this > timeframe to which we are working; and it is to this timeframe that I am > devoting my full efforts this spring semester when I have no teaching > obligations. > > And I thank you very much for that, Peter. > > > > > Mr. Chapell's "request that further TPWG work cease" on all other issues > is not the way to proceed. The W3C will address his point separately. We > have work to do. Let¹s do it on the timetable that we contemplated when I > came aboard. > > W3C Process allows appeal of a Director's decision by an Advisory > Committee representative. I have been appointed by the Director to > handle the processing of this appeal. I have informed the Advisory > Committee that we have received the appeal. W3C Process requires that > if 5% of the Advisory Committee support the appeal we then conduct a > vote of the Advisory Committee on whether the decision to extend the > charter is approved or rejected. > > The Advisory Committee has until 23:59 UTC next Tuesday to provide its > input concerning the appeal. I have no issue with the Working Group > continuing with its deliberations while this appeal process progresses. > > Thank you for all your work on behalf of the Web Community. > > Regards, > Ralph Swick, W3C COO > > > > > Peter > > >
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2013 01:00:13 UTC