httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James A Sutherland <ja...@cam.ac.uk>
Subject Re: HTML3.2 -> HTML4.0
Date Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:58:45 GMT
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, you wrote:
> James A Sutherland wrote:
> > 
> > You were premature, because you invoked a veto on an idea you
> > hadn't even looked at. You saw the word "rename", and leapt to
> > completely the wrong conclusion.
> 
> I'm beginning to resent your putting words in my 'mouth.'  :-(
> I did nothing of the sort.

I apologise if you feel I misquote you; I still feel that asking what was being
proposed would have been better than wading in with a veto. Having said that, I
admit the discussion has been somewhat obfuscated - a clearer explanation from
Chris would have avoided all this.

> > > *Now* the concept makes sense.  Looking back through this thread,
> > > this is the most clearly (by far) that it's been described.
> > 
> > Agreed; the earlier explanation was scattered across multiple
> > posting from multiple people, and would have required reading
> > the thread to understand the idea.
> 
> Which I did, and it still wasn't -- and even on re-reading,
> isn't -- clear.  Your precis made it clear.

Thank you. I admit Chris's proposal was poorly worded; TBH, I reached the same
conclusion you did, for a time. Speaking of which - where is Chris?!

> > IMO, you should have done one or the other before vetoing an
> > unknown proposal :-)
> 
> I vetoed something that was known, but phrased in such a way that
> it was readily misconstrued.

Personally, I would have asked for clarification first, or been clearer with
the veto - "You plan to RENAME stuff in the CVS?! -1 to that!" I agree with
vetoing the renaming, I just think you should have checked that was really what
was being proposed. More to the point, though, Chris should have been clearer
in the original suggestion - if the people doing the docs can't be accurate and
clear, WTF are they doing working on docs? :-)

> > (From your comment, can I take it you have withdrawn the veto??)
> 
> Since it doesn't apply, it doesn't matter.  If the discussion
> ever comes round to actually proposing what it appeared this
> one was, I'll veto it again at the time.

If I have a vote/veto at the time, and anyone proposes "let's rename foo.html
to bar.html", I'll race you :-)


James.

Mime
View raw message