Re: Request to move HTML5.1 to Candidate Recommendation (CR)
> On Jun 3, 2016, at 01:35, Chaals McCathie Nevile <chaals@...> wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 18:14:38 +0200, <marcos@...> wrote:
>> Can we please kindly stop the +1s spam? It greatly diminishes the value of this mailing list.
>> For the purpose of progressing a spec, the only thing that matters is objections.
> Hi Marcos,
> If there are no objections, then the +1's indeed don't matter. But if there is one or more, then having some
measure of the overall consensus of the group is important.
> It's why we've got the arrangement that except where progressing makes a significant difference, we do it
automatically and allow for objection as the exception case. Moving to CR potentially binds members to
patent commitments, which matters to some members as well as to many people "out there in the wild", and
requires that we demonstrate agreement of the group.
> So I'm sorry for the extra mail, but in this case I'm afraid it's part of running the W3C process. If
everything goes smoothly, you can expect this for HTML twice more in the next year: once to move to Proposed
Recommendation, and once to move 5.2 to First Public Working Draft.
I believe Marcos is raising a valid concern here - while I'm not in full agreement that only objections
matter, most of the people get enough mail already and it does make it easy to get important feedback
lost in a chain of +1 mails. (and when it piles up, it's just something you zip through and mark as read,
now repeat time spent doing that multiplied by subscribers of this ML...)
Having a platform where the chairs/staff can get a quick overview of the consensus stats sounds a
like it could save time in the even anyone needs the consensus statistics. (As mentioned in a earlier