- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 10:10:50 -0500
- To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- CC: www-html@w3.org, www-html-editor@w3.org
Oh, and I neglected to say it in my other mail on this topic, but thanks. Your object will surely be included in our report to the Director. Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >Dear HTML Working Group, > > Please report to the Director my formal objection to the way the >Working Group responds to comments. Formally addressing issues is >clearly defined in the W3C Process Document [1] and the Director's >expectations are further clarified in [2]. > >An example for such a response from the HTML WG is the response to >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html-editor/2003JulSep/0315 > > "Thanks for your comment. While we value your input, at this > time we are not able to agree with your request." -- [3] > >Even though Shane McCarron also included some personal remarks, the re- >sponse doen't contain any information but that the issue got rejected. > >Working Groups are required to formally address issues timely, the >response came about 21 months after I raised the issue. Responses >are expected to include rationale for decisions, the response does >not include any rationale. Responses are expected to be technically >sound, the response is not. Working Groups must be able to show >evidence of having attempted to satisfy reviewers, no such attempts >have been made. > >Working Groups are expected to formally address issues on the same >forum as they were raised. I raised the issue on the www-html-editor >mailing list, the response however was sent only to the member-only >mailing list w3c-html-wg and myself. For other issues the Working >Group indicated that some changes have been made to the draft, but >fails to provide any detail on these changes. Such responses can't >be evaluated for technical soundness and thus fail to meet the re- >quirements of the Process document aswell. > >The same basically applies to all responses I've received so far; >I do not think that these responses can be considered substantive >responses as defined in the Process document and thus consider my >issues not yet formally addressed. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/process#formal-address > [2] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/02-transitions.html#formally-address > [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-html-wg/2005AprJun/0080 > (member-only) > >Thanks, > > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Friday, 27 May 2005 15:11:07 UTC