W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January to March 2007

RE: face to face meeting host offers for the HTML WG?

From: Chris Wilson <Chris.Wilson@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:19:35 -0700
Message-ID: <44FAFFCDE516434D84E6B62121DB6A440536ADEE@WIN-MSG-21.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
CC: <public-html@w3.org>

Daniel,
	I am getting quite fed up with you sniping at me.  I apologize
for the delay; due to all the revisions of the charter, the actual
charter ("draft", but essentially the final charter) was delivered to me
on 2/28 (that is, just under three weeks ago) - while I was heading out
to start a round of travel.  I've been in my office for exactly three
days in that last three weeks, and have had an entirely booked schedule
during that time.

Joining any W3C WG requires a process internal to Microsoft to review
the intellectual property and legal ramifications of that participation.
Under the W3C Patent Policy, I would hope any of you in sizable
organizations have to do the same thing.  At any rate, I could not
possibly have started said review until the WG had a final charter.  The
ensuing three weeks has been a result of timing with my travel.  I am
working on it now.  I expect it will take at least a week; it may take
more, it depends on what IP conflicts legal turns up.

You seem to have a personal problem with me being co-chair of this
group.  You've stated your objections, and the W3C chose (partly based
on those, I imagine, though I have no actual knowledge) to have a
co-chair (my esteemed colleague Dan).  Despite your continued claims, I
was not "chosen" - I was asked, based on my history of involvement with
the web and with HTML.  You appear to continue to have an issue.  You
claim  to represent others' opinions as well here.  I would like to
suggest, in that case, that the current members of the WG ("invited
experts" as well, as far as I'm concerned) take a vote to decide if they
want me to be co-chair or not.

I would be happy (as I've previously stated) to not have that
responsibility, and I certainly have tremendous confidence and respect
for Dan, and would support him as sole chair (I was delighted when he
told me he was signing up to co-chair).  Your continued sniping is
making it harder for me to feel like I could do a good job ensuring that
the perspectives of those such as yourself is properly honored, which as
I've said since the beginning was my goal - to reconcile the goals of
those who started the WHATWG with the patent policy and views of the
W3C.  I do not like being called a joke, nor do I like being accused of
being disingenuous.  If this is the way the WG members are going to be,
then I cannot in good conscience believe I can help as chair.

As for FTF meeting - I've offered to host at Microsoft, but really don't
care.  I have also begun making plans to attend XTech, since it seems
there will be a large set of the HTML WG people there.  I have one
potential conflicting time block that I cannot change, from June 12th
through the 26th.  Other than that time period, I will show up
whenever/wherever, and you don't need to wait on me getting permission
to join the WG to plan that.

-Chris

PS - Dan, I expect this will bounce off the public-html list since I'm
not subscribed, please forward it.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 6:27 AM
To: Daniel Glazman; Chris Wilson
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: face to face meeting host offers for the HTML WG?

On Tue, 2007-03-20 at 06:04 +0100, Daniel Glazman wrote:
> On 19/03/2007 23:49, Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> > We're still short a co-chair, so I'm still not inclined
> > to make group decisions of this sort, yet.
> 
> Dan, sorry to say, but this begins to be a big joke,
> and unfortunately a very shocking one. Microsoft was associated
> to the creation of this WG and whatever is blocking them right
> now should have been a resolved problem at least months ago.
> 
> Because I discussed this with other members of the Group, I think
> I will express many people's opinion here : could the W3C please ping
> Microsoft, and use not only an email/phone call but also a needle ?

Well, I flew down to Austin to talk to Chris in person a week
ago.

Chris, can you give us an ETA?

> This is enough, and they should be here right now.
> 
> What was the extreme urgency to approve the charter before WHATWG
review
> and approval if the Group just cannot start because we still miss a
> co-chairman who was chosen as co-chairman almost A YEAR AGO ?
> 
> </Daniel>
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2007 16:31:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 20 March 2007 16:31:24 GMT