Re: Announcement of Calls for Objections on ISSUE-170

Thank you, Vinay. I updated your proposal.
My bad, sorry for misreading your text proposal on the wiki. I thought 
you just wanted to change the first paragraph in comparison to the 
ediror's draft text.

Ninja

Am 20.06.14 00:17, schrieb Vinay Goel:
> Hi Ninja,
>
> Is Option A here meant to be my suggested text for Issue-170?  If so, you
> included an extra sentence (the last sentence).  My suggested text was
> meant to also delete the last line "A first party MAY elect to follow the
> rules defined here for third parties.²
>
> Thatıs the reason mine was Œmergedı with Chris and Susanıs.
>
> If Option A is meant to be my text, can I have that last sentence deleted
> from the option?  As said by numerous members, that sentence is
> unnecessary for the spec and will only create confusion.
>
>
> -Vinay
>
>
> On 6/18/14, 1:25 PM, "Ninja Marnau" <ninja@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> Dear WG participants,
>>
>> as discussed in the call today we have to do a Call for Objections to
>> decide upon the text for ISSUE-170: Limitations around data append and
>> first parties. I kindly ask you to participate, if you have objections
>> against one of the two text proposals. Deadline for your objections is
>> July 2, midnight Eastern.
>>
>> [Call for Objections] Limitations for first parties
>> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/49311/tpwg-first-parties-170/
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Ninja
>>
>

Received on Thursday, 19 June 2014 22:33:14 UTC