- From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:09:03 +0200
- To: "Steven Faulkner" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Chris Wilson" <chris.wilson@microsoft.com>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, www-archive@w3.org
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:58:30 +0200, Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote: >> 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 hasn't gone to a vote yet as far as I can tell. So if this was indeed a decision it would be in violation of the W3C Process. > 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. It may sound odd, but as far as I can tell that's how it works per our charter. (Though it seems a bit derogatory to say that about Ian, as he quite clearly explains why changes are made.) > 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. I'm not sure what this snide remark is supposed to mean. > [1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies -- Anne van Kesteren <http://annevankesteren.nl/> <http://www.opera.com/>
Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 11:14:51 UTC