- From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:13:50 +0200
- To: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, "Al Gilman" <alfred.s.gilman@ieee.org>
- Cc: "Steve Faulkner" <sfaulkner@paciellogroup.com>, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, wai-xtech@w3.org, "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:28:09 +0200, Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote: > How can an HTMLWG open issue be closed if it already has an action > item is bound to it and that action item is in progress? ... By consensus of the working group - something that has clearly not been achieved yet. > Just minutes after that, Dan sent a message to html-public that said: > "I'm inclined to let 'open' mean we have a clear plan or next step for > working on it, vs 'raised"' which means it's probably an issue but > nobody has volunteered to address it or move it forward." [9] > > So I ask, how can issue 31 be closed if it already has an action item > 54 bound to it and that action item is in progress and has volunteers? Looks like an administrative error to me. Reopening for now. chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Opera Software, Standards Group je parle français -- hablo español -- jeg lærer norsk http://my.opera.com/chaals Try Opera 9.5: http://snapshot.opera.com
Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 10:15:18 UTC