W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > August 2010

RE: Ballot: email vote on proposal to request another PER transition for AssocSS

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:36:00 -0400
Message-ID: <9B2DE9094C827E44988F5ADAA6A2C5DAB0697E@HQ-MAIL9.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
John is correct (not that I forgot, but the rest of what he said).

To be clear, the draft we are voting to take to PER and that
caused DanielG to remove his objection is the draft we emailed
to him (and TimBL) in May.

It therefore does not include the paragraph we voted to add
during our July 28 telcon.  Therefore, a YES vote on this
ballot implies voting for a draft that does not include the
infamous paragraph.  (Whether that rescinds or supercedes
our vote of July 28 is left as an exercise for the reader.)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: johnwcowan@gmail.com [mailto:johnwcowan@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> John Cowan
> Sent: Wednesday, 2010 August 25 15:29
> To: Grosso, Paul
> Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Ballot: email vote on proposal to request another PER
> transition for AssocSS
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote:
> > This email is a request for each of the 10 WG members in good
> > standing (as recorded in the attendance section of the last
> > several WG telcon minutes) to register their vote on the following
> > proposal.  Voting closes midnight Boston time on September 2
> > (that is, when I get in to work on Friday the 3rd, I will consider
> > that all votes that are going to be cast have been cast) or the
> > moment we get at least 7 YES votes (or 7 NO votes), whichever
> > comes first.
> Note (Paul knows this, but forgot):  Voting YES implies voting to
> rescind our previous vote to add the TimBL-dictated paragraph to the
> draft.
> I vote YES.
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2010 20:36:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:40:41 UTC