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 (From your comment, can I take it you have withdrawn the veto??)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.
