Re: Final version of the proposed plan

* Jeff Jaffe wrote:
>This pragmatic approach has been used successfully in other WGs (e.g. 
>HTML5) as a way to organize issues and prevent a steady raising of 
>issues from stopping Last Call.  Once Last Call consensus is reached 
>however, there is an absolute requirement to address the late issues.

Your attitude towards institutionalising process violations is noted.

>I was not confused about the process.  I was confused about your 
>question.  I believe that Rigo responded elsewhere on the thread.

I have not been pointed to a "public status report with rationale why a
new draft has not been published" between April and September by anyone.

I expect there will be a properly recorded Working Group decision to
adopt the proposed plan to ensure anyone who disagrees with it can
record their dissent under the provisions of section 3.3.2 of the W3C
Process. Otherwise dissenters' due process rights would be violated,
which would have to be opposed under the provisions of section 3.5.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

Received on Wednesday, 18 September 2013 13:54:01 UTC