[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: a standards story

• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>,"Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: a standards story
• From: Ann Navarro <ann@w...>
• Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 12:03:52 -0400
• In-reply-to: <p04330100b90ad42d9d33@[192.168.254.4]>
• References: <1021646343.2161.6272.camel@l...><1021646343.2161.6272.camel@l...>

At 11:43 AM 5/17/2002 -0400, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
  I can think of at least two major W3C specs that would possibly have been 
vetoed if people outside the working group were allowed to vote, and I can 
see a few more coming down the road.

"People outside the working group" are indeed allowed to vote (on the 
entirety of the spec), that's how the voting process works, the AC reps 
approve, reject, reject with provisions, or approve with suggestions.

 >The W3C process is sorely lacking a step in the process where potential 
users and implementers have an >opportunity to reject an entire spec and 
send it back to the drawing board, even without the working group's >consent.

See above above - that's how it's always worked.

Or am I misunderstanding your desire? (to have outside vote on every 
decision on what element or data type to include?)

Ann
Ann Navarro, WebGeek Inc.
http://www.webgeek.com/
What's on my mind? http://www.snorf.net/blog/	
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: a standards story
    • From: "Lauren Wood" <lauren@t...>

• References:
  • a standards story
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: a standards story
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: a standards story
• Next by Date: Re: a standards story
• Previous by thread: Re: a standards story
• Next by thread: Re: a standards story
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread