I thought we were specifically voting to obsolete (because this was about wide spread security issues); the minutes do say "deprecate", but we kept mixing up the terminology. I hate our process.
Can other council members weigh in with what they thought we were doing? —Sam On Thu, Mar 8, 2018, at 05:15, Jonas Wielicki wrote: > On Donnerstag, 8. März 2018 10:38:55 CET Kozlov Konstantin wrote: > > Hello! > > > > 08.03.2018, 12:18, "Dave Cridland" <[email protected]>: > > The personal choice of Council was to deprecate XHTML-IM based on > > these facts. The previous Council decided to ensure there were > > alternates for XHTML-IM use-cases instead of deprecating. > > This was an editors mistake. The Council voted to Deprecate, not to Obsolete. > I rectified the issue and I’m going to send out an email when the update is > live on the website. Thanks for bringing this up and sorry for the > inconvenience. > > kind regards, > Jonas > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list > Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards > Unsubscribe: [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > Email had 1 attachment: > + signature.asc > 1k (application/pgp-signature) -- Sam Whited [email protected] _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
