W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > February 2010

Re: CfC: Close ISSUE-55 profile by amicable resolution

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:58:40 -0600
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, www-archive@w3.org, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Message-ID: <1267120720.30230.285.camel@pav.lan>
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 11:10 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> My main concern is seeing that this moves to resolution.  Nothing more. 
>   Nothing less.
> One way to resolve this is to decide that email that you wrote 2.5 years 
> ago did not gain consensus, note that no changes have been made to it 
> which will attract a wider consensus, and furthermore note there is wide 
> sentiment(*) that no change to the spec are required.  Closed.  Fini. 
> Done.  Motion carries over objections.  Never to be discussed again.

Right... that was the way I leaned when I initially wrote to Maciej
and company in this thread. But since then, I've been looking into
whether anyone actually relies on head/@profile**, and it seems that
nobody does. So I'm currently leaning toward just letting it go,
i.e. not objecting.

** http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2010Feb/0207.html

> The other way to resolve this is for somebody to actually take an action 
> which is associated with a credible schedule which has a plausible 
> opportunity to gain consensus.

The work that Manu/Tantek/Julian are doing looks fine to me.

I'm a little confused about the status of issue-55, but if the
people doing the work are happy, then there's no critical
need to address my confusion.

> Which way would you prefer?
> - Sam Ruby
> (*) Yes, I'm aware of Julian's email:
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0870.html
> And believe that we need a change proposal.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 17:58:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:33:45 UTC