- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:07:20 -0400
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Paul Cotton <Paul.Cotton@microsoft.com>, "Philippe Le Hegaret (plh@w3.org)" <plh@w3.org>, "www-archive@w3.org" <www-archive@w3.org>
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 Unless we hear otherwise, we will therefore consider this Formal Objection to be withdrawn.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