Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-91: Removing the aside Element

On 06/07/2010 12:16 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Leif Halvard Silli
> <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>  wrote:
>> The need to continue to discus<figure>,<details>  etc was not
>> expressed in the counter-proposal. If it had been expressed there, then
>> not only would it have lowered the ad-hominen smack of the whole
>> counter-proposal effort, it could also have lead to more support for it.
>
> I wasn't aware that there was any particular need to assert that this
> portion of the spec would continue to be edited like every other
> portion of the spec.  It seems redundant to add that into every Change
> Proposal written from now on, but I can make sure that it is a part of
> any proposals I author from now on if necessary.

Not necessary.

> ~TJ

- Sam Ruby

Received on Monday, 7 June 2010 16:39:31 UTC