Re: SVG12: getPresentation* naming

On Sun 22 May 2005, Ian Hickson wrote:

> On Sat, 21 May 2005, Dean Jackson wrote:

> > Ouch! That's the second time in a few days someone has claimed we 
> > "ignore" issues. In this case, we have not yet responded, but that is 
> > not because we're ignoring it.
> Why is it then? Note that the SVG group published a last call draft 
> _after_ those two e-mails were sent, without any indication that there 
> were still known open issues. Why would you release a "last call" drafts 
> without having dealt with all open issues, if you weren't ignoring
> them?

It was an update to the existing Last Call. The comments still apply.

> Is there somewhere we can see a list of open issues that you have not yet 
> responded to but that you are not going to ignore?

Ian, maybe I'm reading too much into your tone, but I think you're
being a little rude. You know that the SVG Working Group (which you
are a member of, even if it's only due to the fact that your favourite
group does not want to work on an important technology) is not
allowed to "ignore" any issues.

Over the past 6 months you (and others) have submitted lots of
comments on SVG specifications. Without doubt, the group have made
more effort to accomodate your comments than any other person
in history. We do that because we value your educated input, not
just because we are required to. In some cases this has 
caused SVG implementors to complain, asking why we are listening
more to you than them. I'm not asking you to be nice, but at least
*please* try to refrain from behaviour that can only cause 
irritation. I also apologise for any similar tone
I may have taken with you or other people.

Now, on to the meat of your suggestion... can you list a list of
open issues? That is a good idea. We have a group-only 
version that Chris is maintaining. We'll see if we can release
it publicly.


Received on Sunday, 22 May 2005 00:57:00 UTC