- From: Dean Edridge <dean@55.co.nz>
- Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:37:18 +1200
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: www-archive@w3.org
> ... I will fix it when I get to your feedback, just like I fix > anything else when I get to it. There are 2000+ e-mails still remaining in > the list of things I have to fix, and I have recently been replying to > e-mails from 2004 and 2005. > Your work load, including your 2000 emails, are a self imposed problem Ian, You're the one that insists on editing the whole spec by yourself even though the chairs and others have requested that you share the editorial responsibilities. I've offered to help, I've made suggestions to the W3C and to you in an effort to help reduce your work load, if there's something else you think I can do to help, then let me know. > This particular issue is a very low priority as it is purely editorial (by > which I mean, it doesn't have any normative conformance criteria and > therefore the spec would be implemented in exactly the same way whether > the paragraph was there or not). > No, that is/was not the case, I do not think it was a purely editorial issue, it was preventing implementation. But thanks for changing it. > I'm not prioritising minor editorial stuff like this > over key interoperability issues like broken algorithms. If you consider these sorts of things just "minor editorial issues" then perhaps you could let someone else edit these areas for you so you can get on with more important work. > For what it's worth you can see the progress of how much e-mail there is > to reply to here: > > http://www.whatwg.org/issues/data.html > > That, and many other useful links to feedback and so forth, are listed at > the top of the spec: > > http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ > > As I've said, it's not my problem that you want to edit the whole spec yourself. > I have a standing policy of always cc'ing www-archive on e-mails of this > nature that I send. Yeah right ;) dean
Received on Friday, 1 August 2008 07:37:57 UTC