- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:38:45 -0700
- To: "Dominique Hazael-Massieux" <dom@w3.org>
- Cc: public-w3process <public-w3process@w3.org>
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:33:17 -0700, Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org> wrote: > You assume that we can go from "process is broken" to "process is > perfectly suited to our needs" in a couple of years. That assumes we > know exactly what a non-broken process is (which seems hard without > having the said process in place), and that we know how to move from > broken to non-broken in two years. This sounds like XHTML2. Yes I do assume that. As I said at TPAC the problem we have is getting RF commitments. Everything else we are doing with editor's drafts and addressing feedback continuously is working quite great and requires no process whatsoever. Snapshotting editor's drafts for RF commitments seems totally achievable. -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:39:22 UTC