Re: Formal objection on ISSUE-129 (WAS RE: Revert request for r6574)

On 10/09/2012 10:22 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 2012, at 2:15 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Paul Cotton wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you wish to maintain this Formal Objection?
>>>>
>>>> Could you please respond to my public-html@w3.org about this Formal
>>>> Objection?
>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2012Sep/0225.html
>>>
>>> The points raised in the FO still apply, but I'll let the W3C decide
>>> how to deal with it for the HTMLWG deliverable. The problem either is
>>> or will be fixed in the WHATWG version of the spec regardless.
>>
>> For the sake of clarity: does that mean you still wish to pursue your
>> Formal Objection or that you wish to withdraw it? i.e. do you want
>> processing of it via the Formal Objection process to be part of how "the
>> W3C decide[s] how to deal with it", or would you rather we dealt with it
>> otherwise?
>>
>> (I ask because your statement was interpreted in opposite ways by
>> different people.)
>
> I wish to not be involved in threads regarding the W3C process any more.

Unless we hear otherwise, we will therefore consider this Formal 
Objection to be withdrawn.

- Sam Ruby

Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2012 17:07:55 UTC