- From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:58:30 +0100
- To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>
- Cc: "Chris Wilson" <chris.wilson@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org
>I'm not sure what you're referring to but it seems the charter was not followed here My understanding is that the chairs decide if it is required to go to a vote [1] It would be seem a bit odd that the editor a can make substantive changes to the spec at his whim, but the chairs cannot request a change after due consideration. but I am happy to be informed otherwise, if this issue is considered substantive enough to be put to a vote, then so be it. btw It is good to see you recognising the HTML WG charter in this case. regards stevef [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies 2008/8/29 Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>: > -lists > +www-archive & chairs > > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:33:09 +0200, Steven Faulkner > <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> It is also a positive sign that the W3C process is working within the HTML >> WG. > > I'm not sure what you're referring to but it seems the charter was not > followed here > > http://www.w3.org/2007/03/HTML-WG-charter#decisions > > which strikes me as somewhat odd. > > > -- > Anne van Kesteren > <http://annevankesteren.nl/> > <http://www.opera.com/> > -- with regards Steve Faulkner Technical Director - TPG Europe Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org Web Accessibility Toolbar - http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 10:59:07 UTC