- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:30:48 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
- Cc: www-svg@w3.org
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Jim Ley wrote: > > > > I have already corrected you on this matter _multiple_ times in > > different forums. I am not a member of the SVG working group except in > > so far that I am an editor of a spec that is being written in a joint > > CSS+SVG task force but published through the SVG working group. > > And to be an editor of a specification published through a Working Group > there is a requirement be a member of the group (7.8 in the process doc) > so that sentence does not make sense, you cannot be both an editor and > not a member of the SVG Working Group - which I guess is why I've never > understood your previous corrections. I'm a member of the XBL Task Force, which takes 20% of my time, which satisfies my required commitment according to the SVG charter. Thus I am not required to also take part in the many other aspects of the SVG working group's quite intensive schedule. > I am very concerned that sXBL had editors not aware of what was > happening in SVG 1.2, and who then raises issues about the integration > at last call, that to me to be the sort of reason why modularisation has > basically failed, and re-iterates the importance of actually following > the process document. The XBL task force members were actively involved in the XBL integration with SVG 1.2. (You will notice that my last call comments on the XBL integration chapter focussed on SVG issues, not on XBL issues.) Note: Strange as it may seem, W3C members do at least attempt to follow the W3C Process rules. While it may not be immediately apparent to you how we do so, it is also not in any way a requirement that W3C members' employees explain to you how they do so. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 1 November 2004 09:30:49 UTC