Re: Proposed issue; Visibility of Web services

On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 16:41, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Hey guys, I was explaining why the TAG did not take up the issue.

You can say why you didn't advocate that the TAG
take up the issue, but it's not your place
to speak for the group.

I let it go when you wrote "The TAG has simply required that WSA
do no harm to the visibility of the existing Web ..."
when in fact the TAG has made no such decision.

But you continue to put words into the groups mouth,
so now I'm asking you to stop.

> By definition, this discussion is over,

By what definition?

We didn't decide *anything*; we didn't decide
to accept this issue, and we didn't decide
that there is no issue here.

Until we decide to accept an issue, we have no
obligation to resolve it (or discuss it
or anything else).

But that doesn't mean folks shouldn't clarify
their request that we add an issue.

In the past, we actually have decided not
to discuss certain topics; in at least
a few cases, we did that by adding
it to the issues list with a "declined"
state.

http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#xformsReview-4
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#uncefactLiaison-5
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#soapRPCURI-11


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2003 18:05:10 UTC