W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > September 2013

Re: Some fundamental issues

From: John Simpson <john@consumerwatchdog.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 08:44:18 -0700
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org
Message-Id: <653E3327-937B-4995-B9C5-6B126132ECD7@consumerwatchdog.org>
To: Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org>
I don't understand why issues that Walter had raised weren't already incorporated in the raised issues.


On Sep 20, 2013, at 12:47 PM, Matthias Schunter (Intel Corporation) <mts-std@schunter.org> wrote:

> Hi Walter,
> 
> 
> thanks a lot for re-sending your mail.
> 
> I agree with you that the points you are raised are fundamental, i.e., to address those I expect more than editorial changes to the drafts.
> 
> As a consequence, you  should follow the guidelines in our plan to either attach it to an existing issue or translate them one-by-one into new issues. Similarily, for each issue, it is important that you propose text how you could resolve your issues (if you cannot propose a solution, resolving them will be hard for the team).
> 
> Non-normative reminders (details are in the plan):
> - The deadline for editorial changes for our next release is today (but may be sent until Sunday)
> - The deadline for creating new issues is October 02 (with at least one proposed text)
> - New text proposals are appreciated ASAP but I will send additional calls for text proposals for each issue.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> matthias
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 20/09/2013 21:01, Walter van Holst wrote:
>> Dear Workgroup members,
>> 
>> Last call Matthias requested for comments on the compliance spec (at
>> least, that was my understanding of the challenging audio quality during
>> the call, the minutes do not clarify this).
>> 
>> Looking at it again, it made me feel that none of the issues raised by
>> me in May have been addressed so far in any way. See for a list of those
>> issues the attached mail to this list from back then.
>> 
>> Regarding the TPE itself, as far as I am concerned there is little in
>> there that would prevent us from going forward, thanks to both David
>> Singer and Roy Fielding. The issue is what it all means from a
>> compliance perspective and the fact that the compliance spec has
>> progressed little since May does not instill me with confidence about
>> getting anywhere near something meaningful.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>>  Walter
> 
Received on Saturday, 21 September 2013 15:44:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:18 UTC