W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Comments on https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html

From: Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:17:50 +0300
To: "Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)" <Michael.Champion@microsoft.com>, "Jeff Jaffe" <jeff@w3.org>, "Arthur Barstow" <art.barstow@gmail.com>, "Ralph Swick" <swick@w3.org>, "ab@w3.org" <ab@w3.org>, "GALINDO Virginie" <Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com>
Cc: "soohong.park@samsung.com" <soohong.park@samsung.com>, "David Singer" <singer@apple.com>, "Jay Kishigami" <jay@kishigami.net>, "public-w3process@w3.org" <public-w3process@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.xh9of00hy3oazb@>
On Fri, 27 Jun 2014 23:17:43 +0300, GALINDO Virginie  
<Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com> wrote:

> +1 (informative, as my AB mandate starts on 1st of July)
> Lets move forward with the changes.

I'm not going to get it done before Wednesday. At which point you'll be in  
the AB for real.


> Virginie
> From: Michael Champion (MS OPEN TECH)  
> [mailto:Michael.Champion@microsoft.com]
> Sent: vendredi 27 juin 2014 21:09
> To: Jeff Jaffe; Arthur Barstow; Ralph Swick; ab@w3.org
> Cc: GALINDO Virginie; soohong.park@samsung.com; David Singer; Jay  
> Kishigami; public-w3process@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Comments on  
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html
>> , can we have an AB consensus to move
>> forward with those changes
> I agree with the proposed consensus
> Mike
> ________________________________
> From: Jeff Jaffe<mailto:jeff@w3.org>
> Sent: ‎6/‎27/‎2014 11:21 AM
> To: Arthur Barstow<mailto:art.barstow@gmail.com>; Ralph  
> Swick<mailto:swick@w3.org>; ab@w3.org<mailto:ab@w3.org>
> Cc: GALINDO Virginie<mailto:Virginie.Galindo@gemalto.com>;  
> soohong.park@samsung.com<mailto:soohong.park@samsung.com>; David  
> Singer<mailto:singer@apple.com>; Jay  
> Kishigami<mailto:jay@kishigami.net>;  
> public-w3process@w3.org<mailto:public-w3process@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Comments on  
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/AB/raw-file/5508dec95a6a/tr.html
> Art is satisfied that Chaals' proposals to address David Singer's
> comments addresses his comment #1 in his formal objection.
> In Chaals' proposals to the w3process CG, he identifies which of David's
> comments should be addressed immediately as they are editorial and which
> should be issues for the future.  Noting that there has been no pushback
> on the CG list to Chaals' proposals, can we have an AB consensus to move
> forward with those changes and thereby be in a position to ask for
> Director approval of the new process document?
> (Separately, Ralph has worked with Art to resolve the other comments of
> his formal objection.)
> Jeff
> On 6/25/2014 11:52 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>> On 6/18/14 6:25 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile wrote:
>>> For some of David's comments below I have raised issues. For those I
>>> believe are truly editorial, I have said what I propose to do - this
>>> is open to discussion, but I have not raised an issue.
>> FWIW, Chaals' proposals and new Issues sufficiently address my comment
>> #1.
>> -Thanks, AB
> ________________________________
> This message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressees  
> and may contain confidential information. Any unauthorized use or  
> disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited.
> E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Our company shall not be liable  
> for the message if altered, changed or falsified. If you are not the  
> intended recipient of this message, please delete it and notify the  
> sender.
> Although all reasonable efforts have been made to keep this transmission  
> free from viruses, the sender will not be liable for damages caused by a  
> transmitted virus.

Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru         Find more at http://yandex.com
Received on Monday, 30 June 2014 12:18:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:19 UTC