I wasn't declining interviews (I'm always happy to reply to any questions by e-mail), I was busy with some family and work matters. The same matters that prevented me from actually doing the revert in the two business days that the chairs so kindly demanded that I do the revert in. By the time I was able to get back online and do what the chairs asked me to do, they had decided to go over my head and revert the spec themselves, leading to the CVS conflicts that are now going to cost us a few hours to fix. (I haven't had the time to deal with those yet, since there's some actually important spec feedback to deal with first, which is a higher priority than dealing with the make-work that the chairs just created for no good reason.)
This really was a weird case. What could have been a purely pleasant technical discussion grounded in use cases and resolved in a few days has instead turned into a political fiasco with hours of wasted technical work, entirely because of the chairs' unwillingness to cooperate with the person actually editing the spec at the W3C.
This was only one of many different acts by Hixie that demonstrates his disdain for the W3C and the HTML WG within the W3C.
That's what led to me suggestion that the only hope for the W3C to stabilize HTML5 is to replace Hixie as editor. He does not play well with others.
Even his comment to your story…it would have been a simple matter for the editor to drop a note to the W3C that he can't make the change now, will do so in a few days. After all, if he had time to drop in on the WHATWG IRC channel, he had time to send a quick note to the HTML WG email list.
Even then, he wasn't willing to revert the dropping of time–he was only going to add time back after making several modifications to it that weren't discussed in the HTML WG.
I'm not happy at the W3C's willingness to continue putting up with Hixie's nonsense–which just shows how ludicrous his complaint is about "the chairs' unwillingness to cooperate with the person actually editing the spec at the W3C".
The spec should have multiple editors. We cannot afford to have HTML owned by one man.
Hixie is spinning.
Hixie was at TPAC on the 3rd of November. He was in the room when most people voted to put time back in the spec, (as was I) I am pretty sure he was there later in the day when the chairs sent the revert request – http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Nov/0011.html after the revert request was made he carried out 2 mods to the spec on the 3rd and 2 further on the Friday (4th) ( http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=6810&to=6811). So he had ample opportunity to make the revert. And if he could not he was at TPAC again on Friday (as was I) All he needed to have done is mention to the chairs that he could not make the revert by the requested date crisis averted.
The W3C could have given a more reasonable time-frame for the revert and Hixie could have sent a "v busy, will revert l8r LOL" text. It doesn't really matter.
Let's all just get back to work on HTML5 because the longer we dwell on the time debacle, the harder it is for the people who really use HTML5 to justify it to men in suits who pay the bills.