W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webid@w3.org > February 2013

Re: opening issue-74 - Re: (Dis)Proving that 303s have a performance impact.

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:39:21 -0500
Message-ID: <51228369.4050806@openlinksw.com>
To: public-webid@w3.org
On 2/18/13 2:19 PM, Andrei Sambra wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Kingsley Idehen 
> <kidehen@openlinksw.com <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
>     On 2/18/13 1:34 PM, Andrei Sambra wrote:
>         The notice was never "inserted", especially not by "exploiting
>         the editor privilege" as you have stated earlier. I find that
>         accusation very offensive and I would like to ask you to
>         refrain from doing it again. The note was there from the
>         beginning, when we split the spec last year.
>     Andrei,
>     And guess what, I hereby apologize for making that accusation.
>         Please look at the mercurial history if you want to confirm it.
>     Yes, I had a conversation with Melvin (offline) and his unveil
>     this most vital piece of information. Now, bearing in mind my
>     apology, could at least acknowledge the fact that you could have
>     simply provided this reply to my earlier mails [1].
> At that point I was simply defending the reason why I wrote the note 
> in the first place.

Yes, because you assumed I was aware of that fact.
> The spec had the note ever since November 18th, 2012 [1].

My birthday. Not the day I would have been looking to read that note :-)
> I have also publicly announced [2] that I was finishing the spec draft 
> on Nov. 19th, 2012, so being unaware of it was not my fault.

I am not saying it was your fault. I am simply saying you could have 
reiterated the fact that I was (unknowingly) contradicting.

> I simply assumed that you had read the spec before starting accusing me.

I read the spec, of course. But that doesn't really mean I read the spec 
also knowing the genesis of an item that spooked me, relative to my 
specific context i.e., here is a spec update following the conclusion of 
the vote about the definition of a WebID.

Anyway, I think we've all learned something from this endeavor re., the 
mercurial nature of context and emails :-)

> Andrei
> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/WebID/rev/427afd1d488b#l1.34
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2012Nov/0111.html



Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Received on Monday, 18 February 2013 19:39:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:05:49 UTC