Re: w3process-ISSUE-124 (WHATWG-blacklist): Normative Reference policy should explicitly black list WHATWG specs [Normative Reference Policy]

On 2014-09 -08, at 13:18, Revising W3C Process Community Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:

> w3process-ISSUE-124 (WHATWG-blacklist): Normative Reference policy should explicitly black list WHATWG specs [Normative Reference Policy]
> 
> http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/124
> 
> Raised by: Arthur Barstow
> On product: Normative Reference Policy
> 
> If a group has consensus that an "external reference" (such as a WHATWG spec) meets the group's requirements, then with respect to publishing a Technical, such a reference should be permitted. However, based on my conversations with Consortium staff last week, the Director will NOT permit a Proposed Recommendation to include a normative reference to a WHATWG spec. 
> 
> Although I disagree with the Director's position here (because I think the processes should defer to the opinion of the group and implementors), the Issue is the Normative Reference Policy [NRP] should explicitly identify those external groups the Director has explicitly blacklisted. As such, and to help avoid confusion, set expectations, etc., NRP should be updated to explicitly blacklist WHATWG.
> 

Art

By misrepresenting me here,  that the WhatWG group had been explicitly blacklisted by me, you did me and the whole group a massive disservice.  You owe me personally and I think the group an apology.  You wasted a lot of everyone's time in putting fuel for the the resulting flame wars.    

I am sorry I didn't see the source of this earlier,  I spent a lot of time following the polarized and bitter further down river.

The name even of this issue itself is quite inflammatory just itself.  I am not impressed.

Tim Berners-Lee
Director, W3C