On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 19:12, Rowan Collins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 17:59, Chase Peeler <chasepee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I'm not a voter, but, I have a question. If this fails, does that mean > the > > original RFC that passed is still in effect? > > > > > Yes, this is really ambiguous, and risks the situation being even more > confusing than it was before. > > The "No" column on this RFC already includes people who voted "Yes" on the > previous version; is this an indication that they have changed their mind > about removing short tags, or that they prefer the original proposal? > > I think we urgently need to clarify this, and may need to reset the vote > with one or more clearer questions. > > Regards, > -- > Rowan Collins > [IMSoP] This RFC supersedes the previous one as stated in the the RFC itself : " This RFC supersedes the previous one and proposes a different deprecation approach." meaning that the previous one is void. I don't know why this is ambiguous and needs to be said once again. Best regards George P. Banyard
