- From: Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 17:43:40 +0900
- To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
- Cc: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Hi Steve, > @2011-02-02 08:31 +0000: > hi mike, thanks for your detailed explanation. > > While i consider that the decision by the chairs decision was not based on > any explicitly stated process rule. It is now clear that the rule is: > > Once an issue is closed it loses its status as a pre last call issue Yeah, I think that's a close enough description. > The term prejudicial was meant to refer the effect upon the issue's pre-last > call status. As in the issue is closed with prejudice (it will no longer be > cosnidered as a pre last call issue) OK, I see. > I will not pursue this any further as it will be a waste of time. All right --Mike -- Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Wednesday, 2 February 2011 08:43:47 UTC