W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2008

Re: drastic reduction of HTML WG issue tracker contributors: explanation please?

From: Steven Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:49:49 +0100
Message-ID: <55687cf80806160249k6b5dce64g5a66085c34d827d6@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>
Cc: connolly@w3.org, chris.wilson@microsoft.com, mike@w3.org, alfred.s.gilman@ieee.org, brewer@w3.org, public-html@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org, www-archive@w3.org, wai-liaison@w3.org

Hi Gregory,

> 1. what caused the chairs to remove 10 participants in "good standing"?

the answer  appears in the IRC logs

 [18:56] <DanC> MikeSmith, do you know why there are just 5 people in
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/ there were a dozen or so as of
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-issue-tracking/2008Apr/0000.html
[18:56] <MikeSmith> because of issues 42-50

source: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20080613#l-359

2008/6/16 Gregory J. Rosmaita <oedipus@hicom.net>:
>
> aloha!
>
> i recently visited:
>
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/users
>
> and discovered, to my surprise, that the number of persons listed as
> issue tracker participants have been reduced to six:
>
>  * Dan Connolly
>  * James Graham
>  * Shawn Medero
>  * Julian Reschke
>  * Michael(tm) Smith
>  * Chris Wilson
>
> last week, the list included:
>
>  * Dan Connolly
>  * Michael Cooper
>  * Karl Dubost
>  * James Graham
>  * Ian Hickson
>  * Lachlan Hunt
>  * David Hyatt
>  * Charles McCathieNevile
>  * Shawn Medero
>  * Julian Reschke
>  * Gregory Rosmaita
>  * David Singer
>  * Michael(tm) Smith
>  * Maciej Stachowiak
>  * Anne van Kesteren
>  * Chris Wilson
>
>   * 16 group participants,
>   * 16 in good standing,
>   * 12 participants from 5 organizations
>   * 4 Invited Experts
>
> [retrieved 1:44 PM EDST (US) from
> http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=41863]
>
> which leads to the following questions:
>
> 1. what caused the chairs to remove 10 participants in "good standing"?
>
> 2. why were those who were eliminated from the issue tracking group NOT
> informed?
>
> 3. what is the criterion for retention on the issue tracker group?
>
> 4. how does one get "reinstated" to the issue tracker group
>
> please address these questions in as timely a manner as possible -- are
> the chairs curtailing participation in the issue tracker group, and if
> so, why were some members dropped whilst others were retained?
>
> i originally asked the chairs for a clarification of issue tracking
> states (raised, open, closed) and policies, but did not expect the
> outcome to be the draconian reduction of the issue tracking group
> without an explanation on the part of the chairs to those who were
> eliminated from the issue tracking group...
>
> is there a documented resolution to reduce the issue tracking group?
> if so, what were the criteria that led to the elimination of many and
> the retention of a few?
>
> gregory.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Men are not against you; they are merely for themselves.
>                              -- Gene Fowler (1890-1960)
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Gregory J. Rosmaita: oedipus@hicom.net
> Camera Obscura: http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/index.html
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>



-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG Europe
Director - Web Accessibility Tools Consortium

www.paciellogroup.com | www.wat-c.org
Web Accessibility Toolbar -
http://www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html
Received on Monday, 16 June 2008 09:50:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:18 GMT