- From: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <sebastian@dreamlab.net>
- Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2007 16:06:51 +0200
- To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
The issue I've seen it that one group comes to consensus, passes it over to the other group, the other group starts discussion again, comes to a new consensus that may be different, passes it back to the first group, the first group that already reached consensus re-starts discussion, comes to a different consensus, passes it over... Alternatively, one group comes to consensus, passes it over to the other group saying "no changes possible, just sign off please" to avoid endless loops as described before. Clearly, both approaches aren't optimal. This is an organizational problem that is completely independent from whether or not the liaison person between the groups or joint editor is doing a great job or not, nor am I suggesting that isolation is therefore a great idea. - Sebastian Murray Maloney schrieb: > > > [...] >> There are members of the WHATWG who do not _want_ to contribute via the >> HTML WG, just like there are members of the HTML WG who do not want to >> contribute via the WHATWG, and members who don't want to contribute in >> either list (e.g. who prefer forums, or don't care about standards >> development per se and would rather stay in their part of the world and >> have us go to them). We have to cater for all these people, otherwise our >> specification won't be good for them, and thus our spec won't be as >> good a >> step forward for humanity as it otherwise could be. >> -- >> Ian Hickson > > +1 > > Murray Maloney > murray@muzmo.com > > >
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2007 14:07:06 UTC