- From: Jeff Jaffe <jeff@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:09:40 -0400
- To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
On 6/17/2013 8:53 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: > On 6/17/13 8:51 AM, ext Jeff Jaffe wrote: >> On 6/17/2013 8:15 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote: >>> It seems like it would be helpful to try to get consensus on the >>> high priority issues before soliciting proposals to address those >>> issues (and analyzing proposed resolutions like Chaals'). Do you >>> support this or has it already been decided that Chaals' proposal is >>> the sole proposal of this group's focus? >> >> I'm not sure what you mean by "do you support this"! > > "this" is the "It seems like it would be helpful to try to get > consensus on the high priority issues before soliciting proposals to > address those issues" part. I think it is definitely helpful to get consensus on the high priority issues. In last week's AB meeting - we spent a great deal of time discussing "wide review" because I believe that there was a consensus that this was high priority. I'd be interested in your sense of the highest priority issues. I'm not sure that we need to tell people not to address issues which are lower priority. Especially if they are small editorial oversights in the document, it makes sense to clean them up as soon as they are identified. > > -AB > >
Received on Monday, 17 June 2013 13:09:53 UTC