p.s. lest you accuse me of promoting such a process, please note that I have always argued against writing such references into a spec; i am no apologist for this behavior; but it is what it is, and it's out there, so address that reality... On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com> wrote: > One could also argue that taking 10 years to move this spec to REC forced > the hand of this particular industry. So it cuts both ways. > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com > > wrote: > >> “How is this done? By considering any form of published W3C document as >> a PAS "publicly available specification" [1] with a persistent URL. This is >> done regardless of the warnings in the status section.”**** >> >> ** ** >> >> So because other organizations have deliberately chosen to ignore explicit >> w3c disclaimers, w3c WGs are expected to deal with the consequences of those >> decisions after the fact ? Is it any surprise that engaging in a dialogue on >> such a basis ought to be somewhat difficult? **** >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2011 05:47:14 UTC