I am sorry if I offended you Josh but I think there are some issues here. I sent you an email off list. All the best Lisa Seeman LinkedIn, Twitter ---- On Wed, 08 Feb 2017 22:29:36 +0200 Joshue O Connor<josh@interaccess.ie> wrote ---- Milliken, Neil 8 February 2017 at 20:08 +1 we should all have a say on this. It's not OK to take arbitrary decisions that will exclude people. <chair hat> No one is making arbitrary decisions. What we require is review of suggested SCs within the group - that is the first robust review phase - then those that are fit for purpose and then approved *by* consensus can be included. There is nothing arbitrary in this. As it stands just including *everything* whether it's good, bad or indifferent doesn't seem feasible and could reflect very badly on the group. We need quality control and require internal consensus that any new proposed SC is actually good enough for the editors draft - and the subsequent wider public review. </chair hat> I do take exception to the idea that we are trying to exclude people. Personally, I tire of this kind of rhetoric or any implication. The group _has_ to do due diligence to make sure our next iteration of the standard is the best it can be. That requires collective effort and focus. W3C process is what it is, lets just try to get down to business. -- Joshue O Connor Director | InterAccess.ie
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2017 08:59:15 UTC